The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-10-05 CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle X Vacant X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 3. Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale: (JUB Study is not ready please table to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting) Table to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting 4. Request for Sewer Service bv Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley: Prepare Agreement with Boise City 5. Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05: * Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. November 5, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT November 9.2004 ITEM NO. 5~A REQUEST Approve minutes of October 5, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting. AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: ()vv ~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at publiC meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5,2004 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle X Vacant X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 3. Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale: (JUB Study is not ready please table to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting) Table to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting 4. Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley: Prepare Agreement with Boise City 5. Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05: '* Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anv.nn~ rl.poqirinn ~r;rnmmnrt::::dinn fnr rU~~hilitiRC:: rAI~tjOrI tn nnl"':J 5m~ntc:. ::::Inrt/or hc..:::IIrinf"l~ Meridian City Pre-Council MeetinQ October 5. 2004 The Meridian City Pre-Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. on Tuesday, October 5, 2004 by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle and Charlie Rountree. Others Present: Brad Watson, Bill Nary, Anna Canning, Brad Hawkins-Clark, John Overton and Will Berg. Item 1. Roll-call Attendance: Vacant X Keith Bird X Shaun Wardle X Charlie Rountree X Mayor Tammy de Weerd Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Wardle: Mr. Vice-President. Bird: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Thank you Mr. Vice-President. I move that we adopt the agenda as published. Rountree: Second. Bird: It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as published. All those in favor, say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Item 3. Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale: Bird: Item 3, the item for the Black Cat Sewer Trunk has been asked to be tabled to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council meeting. Would you like to give a motion on that? Rountree: So moved. Wardle: Second. Bird: Any discussion? Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 2 of 11 Bird: Moved and seconded that we table Item No.3 to October 12, 2004. All in favor say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Item 4. Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Vallev: Watson: Thank you President Bird, Council members and Mayor and others. This request came to Gary in August. He spoke with Pastor Zackman from Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley. I haven't spoken with him ever. His request was that he be allowed or at least the City of Meridian not object to him getting sewer service from Boise City. The map on the screen, although it's somewhat faded, does show their proposed site down here, south of Lake Hazel Road about a half mile west of Cloverdale Road. There is one point in Gary's memo to you that needs to be clarified. I think Gary was under the impression that this site was within the area of impact and it's not. The area of impact boundary is a quarter mile south of Amity and this side is another % of a mile south of that. This is in our referral area and it is included in the sewer master plan as you have heard me say before, our sewer master plan simply extended as far as it could until it ran out of depth or ran into Boise City limits. So, we do have a master plan trunk way up here at the top end. The likelihood of getting the sewer extended hefe would not be too great, other than the fact that it ultimately needs to be diverted into the Black Cat Trunk, which as we all know is probably some time away, at least on the south side of the interstate. It appears from Pastor Zackman's letter that the motivation behind discharging to Boise City father than an onsite septic system is simply cost. Although, he doesn't specify what those costs are other than to say he would save thousands of dollars. Gary did speak with Boise City Public Works and they verified that they could accept this sewage discharge into their system. Really, I think the only question before Council is what kind of comment we should make to Boise City and two, if we don't object, whether to enter into some agreement whereby once the sewer gets there in the future, he is required to connect to City of Meridian sewer. Those are the two issues, at least that I can glean from Gary's memo. I'll be happy to answer any questions if you have those. Bird: Council, any questions for Brad? De Weerd: Mr. Vice-President. Bird: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: Just to also say that Calvary Chapel has indicated that they would like to stay in Meridian and so when we are there, they would readily annex in, so they really would prefer the Meridian - continued the Meridian address. Is Boise okay with that kind of arrangement, is the question I have for Brad? Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 3 of 11 Watson: Madame Mayor. I can't tell from Gary's letter if they would be okay with a temporary arrangement or not. They have been pretty agreeable to most of - we haven't had any of these agreements actually take place, but they have been discussed with their staff. Again, these are two engineering staff talking together. We don't object to some of the things that elected officials might, but we could make that comment that it's a temporary interim connection and that they would need to put together an agreement to sewer to Meridian and annex when it's available and they are contiguous. I expect that that would be quite a few years in the future. Bird: Any other questions? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have got a question for the legal angle here. What do we do as far as getting a letter - just a letter stating it's okay with us as long as you come back in and --? Nary: Madame Mayor, members of the Council, Council member Bird the issue really before you is what do you want to do to preserve that referral error for the potential future that you may expand the impact area to meet that particular site. I think what Mr. Watson is saying is that there does not occur to be in the immediate future, they are certainly willing to sign an agreement of some sort or some acknowledgement - they could probably do the same by letter. I am not sure, 15 or 20 years from now when that's eligible to be in the city area of impact. It's going to really be a question. I think the issue is going to be is if you allow this particular site to simply go without any acknowledgement that they would prefer to be in the City of Meridian when it's adjacent they would hook to your sewer system, then the other surrounding property owners also may opt one way or the other and then that may impact on whether or not you expand your impact 5, 10, 15 years from now. I think we could certainly prepare an agreement with them. The enforceability of it 15 years from now may not be much. If it's not in the area of impact, it's not. If it is in the area of impact, they are going to have to hook to the sewer system anyway. Whether or not the City of Boise wants a temporary arrangement, you know, I think it's their decision on allowing them to hook on now. Whether they unhook to the system later, I don't know if they City of Boise is going to care. Central District Health is the only one that normally cares and as long as they are going to get hooked to somebody else, I don't know that it'll matter to them either. We could certainly prepare an agreement if you'd like. I don't know that a letter from them acknowledging that is probably fine, but if we could certainly do that to at least make it a little more concrete for the future. Whether or not it becomes an issue, we'd have something at least to go forward with. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 4 of 11 Bird: Council, would that be your preference to have Brad and legal draw up an agreement that they would sign and go ahead and let it hook to Boise, with that condition? Wardle: Mr. Vice-President. Bird: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: That would be my preference and that it be maybe not necessarily as far as an agreement, but just an acknowledgement and understanding that when the circumstances do arise they are contiguous and in the area of impact that they do hook to the Meridian city sewer. Bird: I am understanding that you with the agreement that the Mayor sign, the Clerk attests, right? Was that a motion? Wardle: So moved. Rountree: I'll second. Bird: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: It's a grand idea, but in theory, but in practice, who's going to uncover this in 15 years - Bird: Twenty. Rountree: Twenty years, excuse me. Let's do it. At least we are covered for now. Bird: Okay, we got a motion made and seconded. All in favor say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. Bird: Brad, will you take care of that with Mr. Nary and get it forward? Watson: Yes, I will. ItemS. Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05: Hawkins-Clark: For some reason Gary Smith didn't want to come tonight. So, I am pinch-hitting here. Yeah, I think you have all received the memo from Gary that is the annual submission to the Council that outlines the roadway projects and intersection projects and pedestrian projects that the Transportation Task Force is recommending to you to be approved for the - or to forward onto Ada County Highway District and COMPASS as part of their planning projects. The Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 5 of 11 last page of the memo shows all of the committee members, which three of those, I believe, are citizens and then the rest are some combination of agency staff people. Generally, the advice that this committee has been given, which does meet every year - that has been given by COMPASS staff and ACHD staff is basically if there is a project that the City of Meridian really feels strongly about and wants in the process to leave it on our list until the year of construction. Not that there is that much of a risk in something getting taken off of the five year work program, but that was the advice that this committee was given was since they do every year go through a ranking process and they looked to see where was this project? Where did it fall on the city's priority list? So, for that reason we did leave the Locust Grove overpass as number one, Ten Mile Interchange is number two and Meridian Road - then actually the rest of them did change in terms of the rankings from last year's list, but we did leave the two significant 1-84 projects there at the top of the list. There is some pretty helpful information in the comments column there, most of it provided by Daris Bruce, who is ITD staff. At our committee meeting he kind of summarized where those projects were at and the various access studies and environmental impact studies that go with those. So, those comments are provided there for you. The other piece of advice that we have been given relates to the order and the fact that while they will just kind of move - they being the committee at ACHD that moves their way down through this list every year, you know they just start at the top and just kind of move down, but normally you won't see any more than the top four or five roadway projects really have any impact on this next fiscal year for the Highway District. One of the questions that came up at the committee was should we keep Meridian Road from Cherry Lane to Franklin on there as a top five since we do have the downtown transportation study that's underway. I guess the first meeting was just this last week. As you can see, we did shift that from - it was number three last year to number five this year. We moved up Linder Road to the new number three, which essentially makes Linder Road from Franklin north to Cherry Lane, the number one city recommendation for roadway widening in terms of the local system widening after the Locust Grove overpass and Ten Mile 1-84 Interchange. The committee did feel that that was important - a number of developments have come onto Linder Road as you know over the last year, year and one half and they are really starting to see some congestion, especially there at the railroad tracks and at Pine. The only other new item - a lot of this is just kind of shifting up from last year's list. We did take Overland off and we took Franklin off from last year's list, but we did add - at least I hope it's on there - well, I guess it's not. I guess what we added this year was the discussion notes from the meeting. That's where it is, it's on the attachment, which is just notes from our meeting. The committee actually have met twice this year. We did talk about the intersection improvements in north Meridian and those are listed there in terms of the ranking. The Linder I Franklin is listed - oh, I am sorry the Ustick I Linder is number one. Ustick I Meridian number two and McMillan I Meridian number three in terms of the three intersection improvements. However, since these have a much higher priority for us than what can feed into this normal tip process, we are trying to work with them directly to see jf there is other Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5,2004 Page 6 of 11 opportunities to work with those intersections, so if the Council feels like that's something you want to add in here, I guess that would need to happen because at this point it's not in the actual list that would be forwarded onto COMPASS and ACHD. So, unless you would like me to go into any more detail on the projects themselves or answer any questions about it, I think that the rest of it's pretty self explanatory. Bird: Council any questions for Brad? De Weerd: Mr. President. Bird: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: I guess as we look at the top two Locust Grove overpass and Ten Mile Interchange it's very important that the connecting local roads reflect the priorities as well because they are landing roads. I realize we have a lot of road needs, but if dilute some of them by putting further down in there, are we really supporting Locust Grove and Ten Mile as our top two, without having the local roads priorities up high as well? I guess those are my comments. The Nola and Pine and the emergency connection we need for Mallard landing area, those are all listed as developer driven and should they be on there or in a separate category in their own? They are certainly priorities, but since they are development driven, we are taking up one of those needed priority numbers and if certain priorities after a certain number drop off, you are almost wasting that priority number. I guess those are my only observations and wondered if that was a topic of discussion at the committee? Hawkins-Clark: Madame Mayor, at least on the Locust Grove side, that is in the five year work program. The touchdown point at Bentley, I think it is, about 600 feet north side. Of course, south side is going to be finished to Overland anyway, with the crossing. But then as you head north from Bentley to Franklin and then from Franklin to Fairview are currently already in the funded- De Weerd: Well, I realize that, but I guess you had mentioned that they said even though it's in a funding list, you should put it on here, so some of them that are in a funding program are on here, some of them aren't on here. It's not consistent. I am not sure - Rountree: That's the question I have, Mr. President. Bird: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: You have got a mix of projects. A lot of these projects - well not a lot, but some of the projects are already in the TIP and have a (inaudible) established and it seems to me that the committee ought to be informed that that's where they are and the funding level is what they are if the committee Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 7 of 11 wants them advanced in the TIP that could be a recommendation, but probably what they ought to be looking at is additional projects to be considered for adding into the TIP. Because if you get ahead there, then you have an opportunity to get some new projects, whereas a lot of these will just say well, stuff that's already in the TIP is stuff that we still want, but we don't want anything more. Locust Grove is there. I don't know that sidewalk projects necessarily need to even be in the - I think that's something ACHD could probably tell us. Even some of these other projects, I think are already in the TIP as well. De Weerd: Well, I guess Brad if we could note that the year - if they are on a funded year, what year they are and if we wanted to change that, what we would be willing to swap it for, you know. I guess, when I hear the discussions at during our joint meetings with ACHD or COMPASS meetings those are more along the lines of what information they are seeking. If some of the priorities are going to change and we have to reshuffle something, what are we willing to give up to get it and how are we changing those priorities and what ultimate effect it has. Hawkins-Clark: There is definitely a juggling thing going on here, because at least my understanding is that there is some risk that you know something could get bumped down if we didn't have it on our list here, but maybe we actually have two lists or something that get submitted side by side and one reflects the projects already in the TI P and basically affirms that we don't want to change those and then the other ones is when they are in their prioritizing, they can look to our new project list and say okay these are the ones that aren't currently in the TIP. This is the format that we have traditionally submitted and I don't know if COMPASS or ACHD are asking for it exactly in this format or not. Rountree: Madame Mayor, Mr. President I think if you are playing in the arena of projects being bumped or moved then we have a spot at the table on COMPASS when that is considered as well as with ACHD Commissioners, so yeah there is a potential of it happening, but I think as long as whomever our representatives are in front of those particular groups or on governing boards we argue our case that no we don't want that to slip or if it has to slip because of some funding malady that shows up then yeah we will let that slip, but we want something to fill in behind it, so it's a bargaining kind of activity. But, once it's on the TIP it's going to stay on the TIP until essentially it can't be funded or Meridian says we don't want it anymore. I'll give the floor to Katey at this point. Levihn: Hello Mayor, President and Council members. May I take five minutes to inform you of what I think are some changes, if not this year, coming up in the near future with - well, they are actually incorporated here, but I see a little bit of a difference. We do typically say please leave your requests in here so that we understand the importance of them, like Locust Grove overpass, which is funded. By the way I want to say although we program that in our five year work program for '06, it was taking a big risk, which ITD has supported us on that and it is going to be advanced constructed in '06 provided all the environmental documentation Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 8 of 11 and right of way acquisition goes through. And it looks like it will at this time. One thing I want you to notice is that COMPASS is trending towards looking more regionally and what you see in the TIP if you notice very carefully the TIP is limited to principal arterials are higher or regionally significant roadways. Several of your roadways in here are not - don't fall under either of those categories. So, although this says TIP request, it's also TIP and five year work program request because it is a local entity and we have most of those roadways that you have in there. Rountree: So, would that be part of your CIP as well? Levihn: Well, our CIP is related only to capacity expansion projects that are calculated under that formula, so we have got a really confusing, in a way, lists of projects that we keep out there. The ones on the TIP are principal arterials or higher or regionally significant and I can give you that definition if you want. The CIP is only capacity expansion that are needed by a certain formula twenty years out, then there is projects on here that are not in the CIP and not in the TIP that ACHD handles it or typically the arterials, although any collector roadway of course, doesn't meet either of those other two, the CIP or the TIP process, typically. What I would ask for you, what I notice about your - the change in the list here if you decide to go ahead with it is the significant change from what they are showing as the last project on the first page, West Linder Road from Franklin to Cherry has moved up to third place and the top one on the next page, Ten Mile from Franklin actually we have it to Cherry in the program, you ask all the way to Ustick. What's important for us is because that second road, Ten Mile from Franklin to Cherry is scheduled for construction in '07. I would have to check, we probably just let the design contract on that for this year. So, it would be difficult for us to change that, but we could if you were indeed putting Linder Road ahead of Ten Mile Road. That kind of thing is what I am seeing in this program. Other than that the top five or ten are pretty much as they are in the program or not in the program and likely not to be what's number seven, the second one on the second page, rebuild of Pine? Because that's a priority number 43, we are currently funded on our list through about priority 36 or 37, so this rebuild of Pine will likely be evaluated to be put into PO, if the priority remains the same. We are right now in the process of re-evaluating all those priorities. We look at all the change in ADT and what's been built and what hasn't been. So, that is a real candidate to move up into PD. Another thing why I am particularly pointing that one out, possibly also what shows up both current and last year's number ten Ustick from Locust Grove to Eagle, that's currently showing priority 51. That might also - that's pushing it but that might be considered for our preliminary development category in part because you saw we had - we collected more money this year than we thought we would with economic conditions and we had that 4 million, we have moved several projects from '06 to '05 and so that might open up a slot - another project or two slot on the end of the program. I have to qualify that might. There have also been significant increases in oil prices which reflects an asphalt, steel, which reflects in Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 9 of 11 concrete work. We are not sure how that's going to workout. But, J would say those two projects are the ones that are likely to be considered for actually moving into our five-year work program that I would have to check to see if they are regionally significant and would then move into the TIP. That feel at the moment is not. Then that other one, I would point out between Linder from Franklin to Cherry and Ten Mile, Franklin to Ustick. It may be difficult to switch those because I believe those designed contracts been (inaudible). De Weerd: I (inaudible ---) changing that priority, but I don't know- Bird: Any questions for Katey? Levihn: I know it's confusing, please- Rountree: Now that we are all confused - Levihn: Well, it is. We try to not put your transportation task force through a meeting with ITD, a meeting with us, a meeting with COMPASS. We tried to do it all at once and so there is several lists and priorities going on at the same time here. Bird: Any other questions? De Weerd: Mr. Vice-President. Bird: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: J guess what would be helpful on this list is to show where they are and at in the funding and I should have brought my map and I didn't think to. But, it would also be helpful as we submitted if there is a funding year to it, so it's kind of like the item three and four for this year that was five and six last year. We would see that difference and I guess we don't want to send out mixed messages to ACHD and I think we have been pretty aggressive in showing that Ten Mile is that priority and that would put Ten Mile ahead of Under and I think that's reflected as well on your work plan. Levihn: Right now Ten Mile is for construction in 2007 and Under in 2009. Bird: That's the way it was given to us (inaudible). We need to switch those. De Weerd: Mr. Vice-President. Bird: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: I guess maybe we can do a little bit of clean up on this and also we see the ranking from last year. If we can re-rank or if we can sort these to the ( '. Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting October 5, 2004 Page 10 of 11 proposed ran kings, it also makes it easier to read what has been changed and at the funding years and have Council look at it again next week and just maybe do some sorting as Katey has suggested. Would that be acceptable, Brad? Hawkins-Clark: So, reorder based on current year priorities, but then is there something in addition to that? De Weerd: Well, kind of take the regionally significant. Also put in funding years - that there are funding years, so Council can, better synthesize what information we have here. Hawkins-Clark: Yeah, they are hidden in there, but I think everything that has a funding year is in there. It's just a little bit imbedded. Levihn: We could help with that. I would suggest putting in a separate columns, two columns. One showing funding year and one showing regionally significant in TIP, in CIP in five year work programs or something like that. Make it simple. Hawkins-Clark: Would you like us to work that together and then bring back to you next week? Bird: Is that your preference, Council? Rountree: That would be mine. Wardle: Mine too. Bird: That would be mine. Okay, Brad if you would do that we would certainly appreciate it. Hawkins-Clark: In terms of the projects themselves, though, the Council has none other to add or comments on --? Bird: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: I guess in the current form it's a little bit jumbled to know. I personally would like to see three and four switched. You know, as I was trying to go through this last week when I got it, it just was - it would help if it were done a little bit different. Rountree: Mr. President. Bird: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: One comment I would suggest that the committee contemplate is finish the connection of our community and that's looking at a Under grid ( '. Meridian City Pre~CouncilMeeting October 5, 2004 Page 11 of 11 separation. That's long-term. But, that's the next one in the puzzle to get all of our grid connected across all of our city. De Weerd; The overpass. That's alTO - that's like telling a doctor, in English please. Bird; Anything else? We are done with that and we are done with our Pre- Council meeting unless somebody has something and if not I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Rountree: So moved. Wardle: Second. Bird: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn. All in favor say aye. ALL AYES. MOTION CARRIED. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 6:20 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: II I q I tJ4- DATE APPROVED CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle Vacant I Charlie Rp}mtree X Keith Bird ~ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: a-~V"~ 3. Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale: (JUB Study is not ready please table to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting) ~o.ee.. -fo t?vhtl.u-..-I z.-4 ~ Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Vallev: f'Y7eP~ a.eyr.e..e-n-..~ wi~ 13r?/k C/Jy Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05: 4. 5. * Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Plro;t Po~ t1ffl Plt6hG Notte( -l1\ClV\~\l ( ; CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5,2004 at 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle Vacant Charlie Rountree Keith Bird _ Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Discussion of Slack Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale: (JUS Study is not ready please table to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting) 4. Request for Sewer Service bv Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley: 5. Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05: * Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on discussion. Please use the designated minutes as a guideline only. Meridian City Pre-Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 1 of 1 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. c{{;; CITY OF - erldl;ri~ MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS William 1. M. Nary Keith Bird Charles M. Rountree Shaun Wardle CITY DEPARTMENTS Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888-1234/ fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 E. Bower Street 888-3579/ fax 898-5501 Planning & Zoning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-5533/ fax 888-6854 Police 1401 E. Water tower Lane 888-6678/ fax 846-7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 200 898-5500/ fax 898-9551 - Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211 / fax 887-1297 - Sewer (WWTP) 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191/ fax 884-0744 - Water 2235 N. W. 8th Street 888-5242/ fax 884-1159 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issues: Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05 Discussion and Review of Clothing Policy The public is welcome to attend the meeting. DATED this 1 st of October, 2004. CITY HALL 33 EAST IDA 1-1 0 AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLEHK-FAX 888.4218 HUMAN HESOURCES -E\X 884.8723 FINN-ICE & UTILITY BILLING -Fi\X 1187.411 13 ~],\Yon's OFF]CE-I~\X 884-811 9 October 1 , 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 5,2004 ITEM NO. 3 REQUEST Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk By David Turnbull and Frank Varrjale (JUB Study is not ready please table to October 12, 2004) AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUilDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached EmaU from Brad watson -p~b } 1}.- ~ OJ,I Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: MaterJals presented at public meetings shalt become properly of the City of Meridian. Tara Green From: Sent: To: Subject: Brad Watson [watsonb@meridiancity.org] Thursday, September 30,20043:27 PM Tara Green (E-mail); Jessica Johnson (E-mail); Will Berg (E-mail); Mayor De Weerd (E-mail) October 4 PreCouncil We were notified by JUB Engineers that they will not have the sewer study of the area north of Chinden done until late next week. Evidently, the employee who was working on it recently left their firm. This study directly relates to the North Black Cat Sewer item that David Turnbull and Frank Varriale want to discuss at the Pre-Council meeting. I am recommending this item be postponed until the October 11 Pre-Council meeting. I spoke with Mr. Turnbull yesterday and told him this, also. Please call if you have any questions. Thank you, BRW Brad Watson, P.E. City Engineer Meridian Public Works Dept. 660 E. watertower, Suite 200 Meridian, ID 83642 (208)898-5500 (208)898-9551 fax watsonb@meridiancity.org www.meridiancity.org 1 October 1, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 5,2004 ITEM NO. 4 REQUEST Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUilDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached t fl(fJP~ Ci~ tv V /;/ ,n~orl-' rv fI ('" ij Vi Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become properly of the City of Meridian. City of Meridian Public Works Dept. RECEIVED SEP 3 n 2.00~ city ot Meridi~n City Clerk oHlce Memo To: Mayor De Weerd From: Gary D. Smith. PE CC: file, Brad Date: September 10, 2004 Re: Request for Sewer Service - Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley.. Lake Hazel Road Hi Mayor: I telephoned Pastor Zachman, of the Calvary Chapel, to obtain some details to the letter that he recently sent to you requesting that he be allowed to connect this property to Boise City sewer. His church property is located on the south side of Lake Hazel and is about Y:z mile west of Cloverdale Road. This property is within our Area of Impact, which has an eastern boundary % mile west of Cloverdale. He said the property is about 1000 feet from Boise's sewer line, which is serving the Medallist Subdivision that is next to the Boise Ranch Golf Course. He would need to pump his sewage to Boise's system. I also called John Johnson at Boise City Public Works to verify the details of their sewage collection system in this area. John confirmed that theIr sewer is In this location and that the church would need to pump to get there. He also indicated he did not think it would be a problem to accept the church's sewage, from a capacity standpoInt. Pastor Zachman states in his letter that he is willing to accept this connection to Boise as a temporary one until such time os Meridian r s sewer system is extended to his area. He is not requesting to be removed from our impact area. If you and the City Council agree to From !he desk of... Gary D. smith, PE Public Worlcs Dlr~lor Meridian Publlc Works Department 660 E. Watertower Lane. Suite '200 Meridian. Idaho 83642 (208) 898-5500 Fax: {2(8) 898-9551 .. Page 1 his request, it may be appropriate for the church to enter into a short legal agreement with us wherein they agree to disconnect from Boise and connect and pay connection fees to us at the time our sewer system is available to them. I assume they will need to pay connection fees to Boise, which the Pastor should ask Boise if they will refund at the time they disconnect. I don't have a problem grantIng his request as long as a legal document exists and we don I t have to rely on our memories when our sewer line does get there and it is necessary for them to disconnect from Boise and connect to us. From our Facility Plan it appears that a 15-inch diameter line could some day be located near the northeast comer of their property. Attachments: Calvary letter; Facility Plan portion CD Page 2 "'::: '; ,- ;.,,-, ;.,~- " ; ~ ''''',;;~'l i~".:!, lll""!1 ':';; ,<-~~Icr~r:. ~-.-B~-I' ~i-~ i~~ Lc '. , ~, L .., ,_ _ , I , c-l!l .__J ._ . -::~ f.....~.cl~- '; -::-. _... _.....:q -r.,. J} '""l ,or l 1 '-- -.'" d"r;;;,,:: \ : _L -- ,-,e.;, I iL:_.~~.! -' ~ I i -'" \ ~5,]~~-!~~"-::::=:--,.~" 7~~"""~_ ..~ --,\ ~\-:"~,~ "--',,-,,-.' =-!i. r _ ,i, I " ' " " -~ ';:"':--';-='"c...-'--~-; - ["'[' ""H,. I,..nm"ffll I' ,II . r- - - -...,.. I --;-c"""- ....- !j; ~ L "" =~-~r-:"-11 'ill-I ~ . I I ~ [' ~ I I I II J t' ' .~...'.,,. - , ,;.;;,- ::: ~..;,,~';:.-:t:_;,.- -.:::;~ r-- ~U:;;,i~ ;,. ~ " I, i :'11 '.11 Ii 11\11 \",11' ; ;:::.==.' :', '.':~-'-:'-'~-':'_:--~,:QJ"~ -!=o@!lFI'-H;~'~' :-1111111"'1 ll'l I '! )11 ,ij, ,..".-'___,-:::;~;::,,",,i..:.:..:.._.,.: ,y ""-',--~-;;o.-~";:~,-,s:V' !~lli..I\i:""-I,l- i\-~;",' I J II.. l (\1 '! 'I' , '.. "\-1'"-~;;t,;.~<-,. '. ' /~: :~::f:;; ;:C))i! t:;-~.:= ~~;ir~~;L,.," '__;' 'II~ 1,1 } I I' . ' , J .., --- =;+':.4"~~_\-v" , ,-._ ',::-.;-l---,---ot'l. ""---'-~ _I "f3,,,lli4,J II 11.1 II I' .::., .:' ; . -~~. ,..ljf"I!!!lj,.ldi....;:=_..~r,\.,.: ....." :::.::l2r-=-:~:{r-"" :=~ It-~" h t/,";:I.'~.I /-1 \ I / \\'\~\';"'/// j "PI.' L .- ;T":!?t::rf.:~'i-. ',.. ----o'.--;,-'-==.:::-..::-_::::.-:.'iiJ]:.-,-----fI::J:i:r1,:1",.<, I I' ,. ,'. ]) II .' ~ ~.:--J r~-+-- ~-. ~. .....,.",...c t. ~._-- fC-I'1 r ~--...~c ':L1 .... L.11' i I ,".,., .-' ",_\..':'..J. '~=..::..,.'"')-- ~. .{. . ";,.-' ~~::i::w",,~:'- _.....J'~...._j . ~ -ntJJ~ -IY- I I 1'1 I '. ,'-. '. ," .~ ~~_...c.ll-.' ,/,/" -'~'---' :=--=-,'; 1 rl-I ",-I I' ~~l:'."( . "..- ;-~"7.B;:o~~~. \..... ,/::- ~::.i-:~.-.::::;:t~r=r~~-f~. I ill I . "0' l '~t: r:'\I'.' _, .....~,.::!,,':;~I, ,,",,"- , :<'''i'''~ill ....J-:If _~ , i ; i i Iii " i II"":'-"Ir- "ot"\~, ~"LL4~~~ '-""".i'II'"""", S- ,- 1 1 1 J" ( I '. ' , , ., ,I, ',: H1:!~;'lL ~..l~,i;:,~;r~~ rj ~'---'--.J~.L '--'- 0... ~ Q _.,:.,-_1_..J I_~....!. II ,i '-~-',';':'~'~.\. '1--rg. ;-----~V~.~T!Jrer=~~ ~')8uilllli~ i~ ii~ '~j 1: l ~~~=~ ! III Ij I ,. i :::,', i \ 'II' - --I ' 1 , <<:iITlTIIL~:-1 , l-.J--'- '- .:: _~I I 'll W:'!:;I!!li:I\:!<\'~lli .=~ ; At ~~~I '~"~..:;-.- I.-~~JL _..1 'I . ":! : HII'u.!: .': .~ .)7: 1-: \ ..:;,~~:~ ~ 'I I , _ ( 1".'-'.llDI~ 'Irm \.(I-~\ 'i':..1-~.'--.mJl::;~~7."",-~~~~--- ~ _~_L__I ITEp AREA sau~~I' .-' -~~~1~&1f}~S?-~J> > )}~;?JB1l=13ffi~,?'~~': bl\'---~ . ~ . ~ SEWER INTO lTE,," ~1~E;::l;~WJYJ!M~\ ~P.,(?J!::;P,RO?:<-:-:fl''''',r::w.~. I, 18~ ",r--.~ : - --,Il tlTilii~J.!dr\1-1v--;.\\,:~-.J~fHI~R ..'~~~1~p~Ll:',...,' ~'LJ I~ o ERU) tJN1;IL BWfI!~'rt~~'t\~8~N ~' rb!>-/:~i!tpEl:!g;;3:S~ijl~.:...~).~_,- I I 't;-I! ti .,~, \~" ,\y..lill '--' l--I-'.-:u~J; ,- n. I, I I f " - : . -jfl-- -, '-7-:::\ rJlJ1lllU II :.lLt:1:-",-_~__=-==:!-'==::::.... -, ---~~-~--. 1 .,-_ \ . I, ! t , c=Ji , I , I I I' \ I ; I ' I -----.".......j...-~_~__-._~ . l. l\ :' i:y. i, ~.. , , 'I I 'r! ' i!. %i: L~i '! ;t---L~-~I-- I \~".. -'-'r-.~, j f3'/fl I' I.! ,---- --I'~~~-~. '. -- ---=11' --t---1-t-----.-..-'t--- e,_. T---; r,:, j 'i i 'I' , t'~i_._ ~ul, I I "-. 1 I, I ~_L I L"! _ " "'-,'-'1,' 'i, '-I,', :, ' 'i . I 1 ',\,tc-c, I r:' I! J If----~L )1 . )A~! i'1'!"!:ISlCq" 1-~~\OU~~J' '_ .~ LL!.,L__~.LI1 . I: :, 'I I r' w\ i '- I ' III II' ,/ ON( " . r-'.' ': I i - -h-.---~ ! I i L, I '\ I I If--l ~_-- i i 1(1\\)I//,! : ". -: ilF-----l · '! ,':X' ~_-.J--j: I I .: '(tlIJI\;..\\ifltlli/ ! -- LJio-~--i !: . i '! "\c::f'~ !i , ' r 'I II I 1IllllW, J, ' I , I:: i "(.r Ii , , n I )\ II \ .11 I l' '~-ll~, ,J,_'~'~_ ~l--L-I,I-1____~_____\~~'1 It[--'-o --- ----\-.-.~ -- -:i ~1!lJI'~JTlllt'f[t!!{TI c, I I ....J II I .~'":::-:- ... I \. J ., r "1'1 · r-}__,'__~_,:!"~ I, '7,1 \1f'1.I',J! .....f~", "': 1.11, , "', "I :, :' """-"'"",';-----1 I JI "\)':';/:,J Ij'/1 ;-.II--J-I-, I ~--~.-- ! --1 /","/1 ~: I ! wlc I! \ ~ wi "'--L.....: ~:I ~ I \ .... ~': -<I J>J. I ::s ,-;I!" 1-Ll,1-&, :;; ~i~--'""''' i- ir--~------- ~ -1 . '" . u;., ' : ,I ..,. eJl f-J.- nOT Ii f ,., )-'" J'I~ L _1_,. ' !.-2L i I u ,~ _~_ _ __ ___. !L-------i: c22! I; 'bl~ I I I i . L I &0.\ IS f' .1 ' ,1\ ~I:l '. , L /'" -L '.,.., r:l .. ~- - \(~-). , \",0 C{'I! l1Q\~M !,'. "./i" , '. "'illlU (Lu;:f- .., /-'I.'t,",', I:;f; er .Q. Uivl~t. I it'- .'::j L~ IIII'IIIIU - 11111 ( f,!V,,"lI 'I, 'I " j I j I I I I \ !- ~ .'\"".i., i, LAKtAAZEh_~OAD c. ~''''r;-~.:-;_-:::::-::--:-,_. .. -C::.. ~~ " \ '- ~~,~~ _._~- .-..--....--.-____..___ 'Cj J I ;! II )' -I! . .' .~ww_c;: - ~ - l__~___'~--'----r_"__~_._",I.___--------,-----:-.~_ .'-'----T--ronr~.-. - ~ - ,. -..... '. c-..., ~-;-_.- ':::' J '.......-........... .. ____.._ ~i ~ '~.----- ~!: " ~.....-- ;:}.~ -.-! L.....~_ _ '_._~_ _~___..._~! .___ I..J r I' ii i i' !' j: '. !i i ~ ! ~~MBUr1fcr~. ._~ ; r-4i . 1'--"'--"-.---, 'd, 1 ' I 1_ J . . , ' , Ii " I: I' I' Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley 53! 2 Overland Rd. Boise, lD. 83705 - Tel. (208) 342-) 072 Fax. 1208) 385-9502 Senior Pastor - Daryl Zachman August 18, 2004 Rf.CH\lHJ SEP 'j U 10\\1; Meridian Cit)' ot \l. OHice c,ty e,er Mayor Tammy de Weerd 33 East Idaho Ave Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Mayor de Weerd: Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Dal)'! Zachman, and I am the pastor of CalvaI)' Chapel Treasure Valley. We currently meet in the Hillcrest Shopping Center in Boise and have a private school for grades K through 8th. We have purchased property on Lake Hazel next to Boise Ranch Golf Course, between Cloverdale and Eagle, which we are planning to begin developing sometime next year. The property is in a Rural Residential district and not in a city impact zone, however, it does have a Meridian address. As we have been going through the application process for a Conditional Use Permit, we have had great support from the landowners and homeowner's associations in the area. Our problem is that presently there is no sewer service to the property. We've called your city office and have been told that it will be ten to fifteen years before the Meridian sewer district provides service. Our first thought was that we could do a septic system. But high ground water levels make this a costly proposition. The Boise sewer line ends about a thousand feet east of our property line at the golf course. The reason that I am W1iting you is that the Boise sewer district will not allow us to hook up unless we have a letter from your office granting us the right. This would save us thousands of dollars. Even if such permission was granted only temporarily until the time that we either sold the property, or until the Meridian sewer district could provide service, it would help us develop the property much sooner and at much less cost than if we have to provide our own sewer treatment facility. Your consideration of this matter is greatly appreciated. We look forward to soon providing this developing area with a variety of quality community services. Please feel free to call me on my cell if you have any questions~ 412-7759. Sincerely, CfJ~r Oal)'l Zachman Pastor FOR THE PERFECTING OF THE SAINTS, FOR THE WORK OF THE MINISTRy' FOR THE EDIFYING OF THE BODY OF CHRIST - EPHESIANS 4." 12 ** TX CONF","'IATlON REPORT ** AS OF OCT 01 '04 17:55 PAGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIWSEC PGS CMDt; STATUS 131 113/131 17:35 208 895 0390 EC--S 00'26" 001 255 OK 02 113/01 17:36 128300040 G3--S 00'31" 0131 255 OK 03 10/131 17:38 ADA CTY DEUELMT EC--S 00'27" 001 255 OK 04 113/131 17:39 8885052 EC--S 00'2&" 001 255 OK 05 10/01 17=41 CHERRY LANE G3--S 00'42" 001 255 OK 06 10/01 17:42 IDAHO ATHLET1C C EC--S 00'26" 001 255 OK 07 10/01 17'43 ID PRESS TRIBUNE EC--S 00'2&" 001 255 OK 08 10/01 17=44 2068886701 EC--S 00'26" 001 255 OK 14 10/01 17:55 ACHD DEV ----S 00'00" 000 255 BUSY THIS DOCUMENT IS STILL IN MEMORY ---------------------------------------------------------------~---------------------------- I ,- H:~~I "G~l ""'!..... .;.,~:. J"'% ~CI1YO(. ~ . , . --~n... ..... endian i'; '\ ~rO^HO r ~ j ~;\' P 1:/ t"HI._\!'\II'l~"~~ I"lto.sc- \....os..t- tor rv.blrC NOt"\ce... ~ 1'\l.."...I'~H' \ , .. MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUN"crr. MEMSERS William L. M. Nary Keith BI!d o.arlc$ M. Rountree ShaUll W"Tdle NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL ern' D~PI'.RTMENTS Fire 540 E. Pranklin Road 888-1234/ fa>: 8\15-0S\l0 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of P~rks &I R€creation 11 E. Bower S~tcet BSll.3579! fax 898.550 I Meridian will hold a Pre~Councn Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 6:00 P.M. The Planning &. Zoning 660 8. Watcrlower L(lO{~ Suite :<02 88H533! fax 868-6854 Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issues; Pulice 1401 E. Wa~erlOwer Lane !!B8.~678/ fax 8<16-7366 - Discussion of Btack Cat Sewer Trunk by David T urnbufl and Frank Varria/e Public Works 660 E. WatNtower Lane) Su lb. 200 S\l6-550il! fax 1198-9551 - Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley - Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05 - Discussion and Review of Clothing Policy - b\lildh\g 660 E. Watel'tower Lane Suite 150 867-2211 f tax 887-1297 The public is welcome to attend the meeting. DATED this 1!lt of October, 2004. - Sewer {WWTP) 3401 N. Ten MHe Road 888-21911 fax SM-0744 WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. ~ - Water 2235 N. w. 8th Streel 1188-5242/ fax S84-115~ CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208l S8R-4433 CiTY (.lER~-F^X 681H.2JB HU~I,\N (\ESOUl\C~S-F^X 86<1--8123 FI".\NC~ ~ UTllITI' BllllNG-F^^ 887.,,613 'I,WOR'S OFFIr,E-FAX 884.6119 ( ( ** TX Q. ,RMATION REPORT ** AS OF OCT ell '134 l'f: 26 PAGE. 131 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM I'XJDE MIN/SEC PG5 CMDll STATUS 62 10/61 17'06 381131613 EC--S 013'28" eel 254 OK 133 113/131 17'06 PUBLIC WORKS EC-S 00'213" 001 254 OK 04 16/01 17:07 8841159 EC--S 00'213" 061 254 OK 135 10/131 17'1382008840744 EC-S 06' 21" 0Bl 254 OK 06 113/61 17'139 POLICE DEPT EC-S 130'20" 1301 254 OK 137 10/131 17' 10 8'38551'11 EC--S 1313'21" 0131 254 OK 08 10/131 17'11 LIBRARY EC-S 01'1'22" 0131 254 OK 0S 10/el 17' 12 92083776449 EC--5 130'20" 1301 254 OK 16 le/131 17'123886924 EC-S e<l'2<l" 001 254 OK 11 16/01 17:13 2<l88886854 EC--S 13<l'21" 1301 254 OK 12 10/131 17'14208 895 roge EC-S ee'213" 1301 254 OK 13 le/01 17'15 1283006413 G3--S 00'25" 13131 254 OK 14 10/01 17'16208 387 6393 EC--S 013'20" 1301 254 OK 15 113/131 17:17 ADA CTY DEVELMT EC--S 1313'213" 001 254 OK 16 le/el 17:18 9885e52 EC--S 00'19" 0131 254 OK 17 113/131 17'19 CHERRY LANE G3--S 0e'39" 1301 254 OK 18 10/01 17:20 IDAHO ATHLETIC C EC--S 013'21" 1301 254 OK 19 10/131 17:21 1D PRESS TRIBUNE EC--S 06'20" eel 254 OK 20 10/01 17'22 20888867131 EC--S 013'213" e01 254 OK 23 1e/I31 17'26 1213846644135 EC--S 00'21" 001 254 OK -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pier.:&: ro~ t {(fl 1..Ju.6l~~ tJattc.c - -\ \\Cli'\~ \ ~ CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-COUNCll MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5. 2004 at 6;00 p.m, City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: _ Shaun Wardle Vacant Charlie Rountree Keith Bird - _ Mayor Tammy de Waerd 2. Adoption of the Agenda: 3. Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Tumbull and Fronk Varriale: (JUB StUdy is not ready please table to October 12, 2004 Pre-Council Meeting) 4. Request for Sewer Service bv Calvary Chapel Treasure Vallev; S, Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05: "Approximate allowable time set for agenda item may change depending on dillcussion. Please use the designated minutes as II guideline only. Me,i:Iian City Pro-COuncil Agonda -O<:tol>er5, :<0(\4 Pog.10f1 All m.tori.\c: pl'econte<:l ot public meeJjngo wll becomo p'opolly of tho City of Merldl.n. An,,,",, 0"'0"9 llOCommoalltfon lor (I1...b1IIt1OG rolalea 10 dt1CtJml!J1l!1 and/or l1elU1ll\lS pie""" contllCt tho City Clel1<"~ om"" .'88&-4433 ot 'Olm # houro plior (0 the prJb~e meeting. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5,2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle Vacant X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: Dave McKinnon 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LOS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 5. Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 04- ,018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R- 8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: Approve B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 04- 025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: Approve C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 008 Request for a Rezone of .23 acre from R-8 to proposed 0- T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: Approve D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in an existing building in the proposed 0- T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page I of 4 All materials presented at publie meetings shall become property oftlle City of Meridian, Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at &&8-4433 at least 4& hours prior to the public meeting. ( E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-020 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an L-O zone for Medicap Pharmacy by Larry Knopp - east of North Ten Mile Road on north side of West Cherry Lane: Approve F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAC 04-005 Request for a Vacation of side yard utility and irrigation easements on Lots 43-45, and Lots 88-91, Block 23, Ashford Greens Subdivision No.2 by Brighton Corporation - east of North I Black Cat Road and south of West Ustick Road: Approve G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 010 Request for a Rezone of .68 acre from R-4 to an O-T zone for Mittleider Rezone by Leon Smith - 125 West Cherry Lane and 1645 West 1st Street: Approve H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: M104- 007 Miscellaneous request for an administrative lot split of unplatted ground for Ronald Van Auker by Ronald Van Auker - northeast corner of Franklin Road and Gaudians Avenue: Approve I. Approve Beer and Wine License Renewal for Quik-Wok - 3055 East Fairview Avenue: Approve J. Well #25 Control System: Approve K. Streetlight Agreement for Woodside Creek: Approve L. Land Lease Agreement with Ken Hamilton Presentations: Table to October 12, 2004 Meeting M. Approve Bills: Approve 6. Department Reports: None 7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) None 8. Public Hearing: AZ 04-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.91 acres from RUT to R-B zone for Redfeather Village Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of North Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: Continue Public Hearing to October 12, 2004 Meeting 9. Public Hearing: PP 04-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 20 single family residential building lots on 4.91 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Redfeather Village Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at publie meetings shall become property of the City ofMeridiall, Anyone desiring aeeommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at &&8-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the publie meeting. LLC - east of north Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: Continue Public Hearing to October 12, 2004 Meeting 10. Public Hearing: CUP 04-029 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone for Condra Steeves Davcare Center by Condra and Donald Steeves - 1258 East Cougar Creek Drive: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial 11. Public Hearing: AZ 04-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 12. Public Hearing: PP 04-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 33 single family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 10 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 13. Public Hearing: VAR 04-006 Request for a Variance from MCC 11-10-6 to allow a childcare/preschool for five or fewer children to be operated in a required garage area of a single-family home in an R-4 zone for Earl and Donna Bohrn by Earl and Donna Bohrn - 1451 North Santa Rosa Place: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial 14. Public Hearing: MI 04-010 Request to a modify the hours of operation approved previously under CUP 01-016 from 8 am to 10 pm Monday thru Saturday and 9 am to 9 pm Sunday to 6 am to 10 pm seven days a week for Cherry CrossinQ Subdivision by Robnett Construction, Inc. - northwest corner of West Cherry Lane and North Under Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 15. Public Hearing: MI 04~009 Request to allow a one-time lot division to separate an un-platted parcel into two parcels in an I-L zone for Joe Pachner by Joe Pachner - 850 West Franklin Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 16. Public Hearing: MI 04-008 Request to modify the condition of the approved Preliminary Plat regarding the 5-foot wide asphalt pathway within Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's easement for Castlebrook Subdivision No.3 by Uberty Development, Inc. - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 17. Water, Sewer, & Trash Delinquencies: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - Octobcr 5,2004 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 hearing please eOl1tact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 4& hours prior to the public meeting. 18. Ordinance No. 04-1104 : AZ 04-015 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1 +/- acre from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Secret Garden Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - 2490 North Locust Grove: Approve 19. Ordinance No. 04-1105 Revision: Approve Sewer Use and Service Regulations 20. Ordinance No. 04-1106 Revision: Approve Water Use and Service Regulations 21. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1)(b): Support Ownership of Property to Salvation Army for Kroc Center Mcridian City Couneil Agcnda- Oetobcr 5, 2004 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall bccomc propcrty ofthc City of Meridian. Anyonc desiring accommodation for disabilitics relatcd to documents and/or hcaring pleasc contact the City Clcrk's Office at 333-4433 at least 4& hours prior to thc public meeting. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle Vacant =r Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird (\.. Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: fJave- ~/Llhh{n"" 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LOS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~lJ.4..- 5. Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 04- 018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R- 8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC _ west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: ~ B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 04- 025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: ~ C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 008 Request for a Rezone of .23 acre from R-8 to proposed O-T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: W~"IAJL- D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in an existing building in the proposed 0- T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: 4r1"~~ E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-020 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an Meridian City CounciJ Agenda~Oetober5,2004 Page lof3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian, Anyone desiring acconunodation for disabilities related to doeumenlS and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. L-O zone for Medicap Pharmacy by Larry Knopp - east of North Ten Mile Road on north side of West Cherry Lane: ~/I'J- F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAC 04-005 Request for a Vacation of side yard utility and irrigation easements on Lots 43-45, and Lots 88-91, Block 23, Ashford Greens Subdivision No.2 by Brighton Corporation - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Ustick Road: (yr~ G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 010 Request for a Rezone of .68 acre from R-4 to an 0- T zone for Mittleider Rezone by Leon Smith - 125 West Cherry Lane and 1645 West 1 st Street: ~ . H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: M104- 007 Miscellaneous request for an administrative lot split of unplatted ground for Ronald Van Auker by Ronald Van Auker - northeast corner of Franklin Road and Gaudians Avenue: ~~ I. Approve Beer and Wine License Renewal for Quik-Wok - 3055 East Fairview Avenue: t-.../'/~ J. Well #25 Control System: ~(M../ K. Streetlight Agreement for Woodside Creek: ~(r.<../ L. Land Lease~eement with Ken Hamilton Presentations: h I-v &crt?~/2/ Zt?O if- Approve Bills: ~v.c..- 6. Department Reports - IVOM- M. 7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) - /Vojt..t.. 8. Public Hearing: AZ 04-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.91 acres from RUT to R-S zone for Redfeather Village Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of North Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: C~h"'-'-II^- f<41 tPd.l2AJ- ~ 9. Public Hearing: PP 04-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 20 single family residential building lots on 4.91 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Redfeather Village Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of north Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: c,trYV/1 yU;<..t.... JO 1"'- -1-0 t? d. /2. e.. IWI'J 10. Public Hearing: CUP 04-029 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone for Condra Steeves Meridian City Council Agenda - Oetober 5, 2004 Page 2 of3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property ofthe City of Meridian, Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Daycare Center by Condra and Donald Steeves - 1258 East Cougar Creek Drive: ~r,f.fan.t. ..f/~ I c(..f. ~ ~~ 11. Public Hearing: AZ 04-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: p-re?~ ..f/I'I C/...{ r/<Jr 4-'flPi-OVM...- Public Hearing: PP 04-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 33 single family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 10 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: /ll'e-p~ -F/ f f c l..l .frr ~p-p~ ~4tL Public Hearing: VAR 04-006 Request for a Variance from MCC 11-10-6 to allow a childcare/preschool for five or fewer children to be operated in a required garage area of a single-family home in an R-4 zone for Earl and Donna Bohrn by Earl and Donna Bohrn -1451 North Santa Rosa Place: jOf'1tp~ ~/~ ~ elf ~ t;{ehl~ Public Hearing: MI 04-010 Request to a modify the hours of operation approved previously under CUP 01-016 from 8 am to 10 pm Monday thru Saturday and 9 am to 9 pm Sunday to 6 am to 10 pm seven days a week for Cherry Crossing Subdivision by Robnett Construction, Inc. _ northwest corner of West Cherry Lane and North Linder Road: ~fltJAL .;:-/.? (- c;(~ f#-r- Wf'PJ'vI/AA..- Public Hearing: MI 04-009 Request to allow a one-time lot division to separate an un-platted parcel into two parcels in an I-L zone for Joe Pachner by Joe Pachner - 850 West Franklin Road: /Y1e/'~ -I'/;::-Ic.-I...t hv- ~rPv,...e.. Public Hearing: MI 04-008 Request to modify the condition of the approved Preliminary Plat regarding the 5-foot wide asphalt. pathway within Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's easement for Castlebrook Subdivision No.3 by Liberty Development, Inc. - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: /r>-e-p ~ r:/.,c." c{~ ,en,- ~(..((.. Water, Sewer, & Trash Delinquencies: ~_~ Ordinance No. /J4--llo1- AZ 04-015 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1 +/- acre from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Secret Garden Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - 2490 North Locust Grove: p,pprPv...c..I 12. 13. 19. Ordinance No. tJ4-- 1105" Regulations Revision: #t.pjH'VVT^-- 20. 2f. Sewer Use and Service Ordinance No. 04- -II () 6 Water Use and Service Regulations Revision: w/7f\OV/I(.....' EK~Ul1,;".(,- JeJr/~ f/)- '2- 31f5"-I-b : Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 3 on All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabiliti es related to documents and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Ju-ppprt' ~(,UI1MA'It..-/j:J t>F rper.t--, '*" sa.1V-A.fJi-~ Ih-J .,t:;-.... ~ (€~ October 22, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 26,2004 ITEM NO. 5-C REQUEST Approve Minutes of October 5, 2004 City Council Regular Meeting Meeting AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER; CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: ~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meeHngs shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: X Shaun Wardle Vacant X Charlie Rountree X Keith Bird X Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance; Dave McKinnon 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LOS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 5. Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 04- 018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R- 8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: Approve B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 04- 025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: Approve C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 008 Request for a Rezone of .23 acre from R-8 to proposed Q-T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: Approve D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in an existing building in the proposed 0- T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-020 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an L-Q zone for Medicap Pharmacy by Larry Knopp - east of North Ten Mile Road on north side of West Cherry Lane: Approve F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAC 04-005 Request for a Vacation of side yard utility and irrigation easements on Lots 43-45, and Lots 88-91, Block 23, Ashford Greens Subdivision No.2 by Brighton Corporation - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Ustick Road: Approve G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 010 Request for a Rezone of .68 acre from R-4 to an Q-T zone for Mittleider Rezone by Leon Smith - 125 West Cherry Lane and 1645 West 1 st Street: Approve H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: M104.. 007 Miscellaneous request for an administrative lot split of unplatted ground for Ronald Van Auker by Ronald Van Auker - northeast corner of Franklin Road and Gaudians Avenue: Approve I. Approve Beer and Wine License Renewal for Quik-Wok - 3055 East Fairview Avenue: Approve J. Well #25 Control System: Approve K. Streetlight Agreement for Woodside Creek: Approve L. Land Lease Aareement with Ken Hamilton Presentations: Table to October 12,2004 Meeting M. Approve Bills: Approve 6. Department Reports: None 7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) None 8. Public Hearing: P;z 04-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.91 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Redfeather Villaoe Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of North Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: Continue Public Hearing to October 12, 2004 Meeting 9. Public Hearing: PP 04-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 20 single family residential building lots on 4.91 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Redfeather Villaae Subdivision by Packard Estates Oevelopment, Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 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 hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 8&&4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. ( LLC - east of north Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: Continue Public Hearing to October 12, 2004 Meeting 10. Public Hearing: CUP 04-029 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone for Condra Steeves Davcare Center by Condra and Donald Steeves - 1258 East Cougar Creek Drive: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial 11. Public Hearing: AZ 04-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 12. Public Hearing: PP 04-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 33 single family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 10 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 13. Public Hearing: VAR 04~006 Request for a Variance from MCC 11-10-6 to allow a childcare/preschool for five or fewer children to be operated in a required garage area of a single-family home in an R-4 zone for Earl and Donna Bohrn by Earl and Donna Bohrn - 1451 North Santa Rosa Place: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Denial 14. Public Hearing: MI 04~010 Request to a modify the hours of operation approved previously under CUP 01-016 from 8 am to 10 pm Monday thru Saturday and 9 am to 9 pm Sunday to 6 am to 10 pm seven days a week for Cherry Crossinq Subdivision by Robnett Construction I Inc. - northwest corner of West Cherry Lane and North Linder Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 15. Public Hearing: MI 04-009 Request to allow a one-time lot division to separate an un-platted parcel into two parcels in an I-L zone for Joe Pachner by Joe Pachner - 850 West Franklin Road: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 16. Public Hearing: MI 04-008 Request to modify the condition of the approved Preliminary Plat regarding the 5-foot wide asphalt pathway within Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's easement for Castlebrook Subdivision No.3 by Liberty Development, Inc. - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: Prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval 17. Water, Sewer, & Trash Delinquencies: Approve Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 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 hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 8884433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting, ! 18. Ordinance No. 04-1104 : AZ 04-015 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1 +/- acre from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Secret Garden Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - 2490 North Locust Grove: Approve 19. Ordinance No. 04-1105 Revision: Approve Sewer Use and Service Regulations 20. Ordinance No. 04w1106 Revision: Approve Water Use and Service Regulations 21. Executive Session per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1 )(b): Support Ownership of Property to Salvation Army for Kroc Center Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 4 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 hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council MeetinQ October 5. 2004. The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, October 5,2004, by Mayor Tammy de Weerd. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Charlie Rountree, and Shaun Wardle. Others Present: Bill Nary, Will Berg, Ann Canning, Brad Watson, John Overton, Kenny Bowers, and Dean Willis. Item 1: Roll-call Attendance: Roll call. X Shaun Wardle X Charlie Rountree X X Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd De Weerd: Okay. I will go ahead and open the regular City Council meeting and bring it to order. It is Tuesday, October 5th. It is 7:00 o'clock. Thank you all for joining us here tonight. We will begin the meeting with roll call attendance. De Weerd: Thank you. I would like to welcome our new city attorney Mr. Bill Nichols -- or B ill Nary. Well, now that you have tog et a ccustomed to t he Madam Mayor, you know, I'll have to get accustomed to the Mr. Nary. But welcome. Nary: Thank you. De Weerd: It's nice seeing you still up here. Nary: Thank you. Item 2: Pledge of Allegiance: De Weerd: And welcome all of you. We have Item No.2 as the Pledge of Allegiance and Dave McKinnon will lead us in the pledge. Please rise. (Pledge of Allegiance recited.) Item 3: Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LDS Church: De Weerd: Item NO.3 is our community invocation. Please take a moment and join us for this item or use it as a moment of silence. Is Mr. -- or Bishop Jeff Winter with us? Winter: Our kind Heavenly Father, humbly we come to thee with gratitude and appreciation for the many blessings, which thou bestows upon us. We are grateful for Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 2 of 84 the blessings of freedom. We appreciate those who fight to secure our freedom and are fighting in our behalf at this time. We ask thee to please bless them with thy Spirit with protection and care and assistance in their endeavors. We are grateful for the blessing of community, for the opportunity to live here together to participate in the process which we have been so blessed and pray that this night all who present and all who participate in this council meeting will be blessed and assisted, that they will present their piece and that thy blessing and influence will be upon the decisions made and this we pray in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen. De Weerd: Bishop Winters, if [ could present you with one of our City of Meridian pins and thank you for joining us tonight. Winters: Thank you very much. Item 4: Adoption of the Agenda: De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item No.4 is adoption of the agenda. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: We do have a couple of modifications. One on the Consent Agenda. We need -- Item No. 11 needs to be continued until at least October 12th. And also we need to add Item 21, an Executive Session, as per Idaho State Code 67-2345(1 )(b). And with that I move we adopt the revised agenda. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as amended. All those in favor aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 5: Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 04- 018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 04- 025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 3 of 84 Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 008 Request for a Rezone of .23 acre from R-8 to proposed O-T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in an existing building in the proposed O-T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-020 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an L-O zone for Medicap Pharmacy by Larry Knopp - east of North Ten Mile Road on north side of West Cherry Lane: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAC 04-005 Request for a Vacation of side yard utility and irrigation easements on Lots 43-45, and Lots 88-91, Block 23, Ashford Greens Subdivision No.2 by Brighton Corporation - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Ustick Road: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 010 Request for a Rezone of .68 acre from R-4 to an 0- T zone for Mittleider Rezone by Leon Smith - 125 West Cherry Lane and 1645 West 1 st Street: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: M104- 007 Miscellaneous request for an administrative lot split of unplatted g round for Ronald Van Auker by Ronald Van Auker - northeast corner of Franklin Road and Gaudians Avenue: I. Approve Beer and Wine License Renewal for Quik-Wok - 3055 East Fairview Avenue: J. Well #25 Control System: K. Streetlight Agreement for Woodside Creek: L. Land Lease Agreement with Ken Hamilton Presentations: M. Approve Bills: De Weerd: Consent Agenda. Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 4 of 84 Bird: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve the Consent Agenda with the deletion of Item L, which will be continued, and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest on all proper papers. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Consent Agenda with tabling of Item L to next week. Was it next week or -- Bird: Yeah. October-- De Weerd: Okay. October 14th. I'm sorry. Bird: 12th. Rountree: No. 12th. Bird: You're back in September, Mayor. De Weerd: Yeah. I know. No one has changed me yet. So, the 12th. Mr. Clerk, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 6: Department Reports Item 7: (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. There were no items removed from the Consent Agenda. De Weerd: We will go to Item 8, Public Hearing AZ 04-022. By ordinance in our -- for our public hearings we are asked to swear in all those who wish to testify. So, those who wish to testify on any of the Public Hearing Items 8 through 16, if you will, please, raise your right hand. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? If so, answer I will. (Affirmative answers.) Item 8: Public Hearing: AZ 04-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.91 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Redfeather Villa~e Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of North Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 5 of 84 Item 9: Public Hearing: PP 04-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 20 single family residential building lots on 4.91 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Redfeather Village Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of north Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: De Weerd: Thank you. I'm sorry, I'm really having a hard time saying anything tonight. I guess that works in the advantage of the Council. Okay. I will open Item No. 8 with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, our first item tonight is Redfeather-- De Weerd: And it's infectious. Canning: Redfeather Village Subdivision. This is an annexation and zoning request of 4.91 acres from RUT to R-8. The property is located right in the middle of the original Redfeather request, which came through earlier this year. This was the original Redfeather. You can see the five-acre -- five acre out parcel outlined here and that is the subject of this new subdivision. It's a very straightforward subdivision. They have proposed 20 single family residential lots and the stub streets from the original Redfeather just connects in an L shape with the lots on there. The gross density is 4.07 dwelling units per acre. The lots -- Madam Mayor, you have got me all tongue-tied. That's not fair. The lots range in size from 6,712 square feet to 12,412 square feet. This is a straight subdivision; it is not a planned development. And that's the basics. I will answer any questions that Council may have. Bird: I have none, Madam Mayor. Rountree: I have none. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Anna. Okay. Is the applicant here tonight? Well, since the applicant isn't here this evening, Council, do you wish to go any further? Is there anyone in the public who would like to offer testimony on this a pplication? Council, what would you like to do? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we continue the public hearings for Items 8 and 9 to October 12th, 2004. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to continue this item until next week. Is there any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Okay. All ayes. Motion carries. ( " Meridian City Council October 5. 2004 Page 6 of 84 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 10: Public Hearing: CUP 04-029 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone for Condra Steeves Daycare Center by Condra and Donald Steeves - 1258 East Cougar Creek Drive: De Weerd: Okay. Item 10 is Public Hearing CUP 04-029. I will open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Just a moment. I wasn't prepared to move that quickly. I'm sorry. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the next request is for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for -- the original request was 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone. They can only accommodate 30 children with the parking that's provided. So, it would just be limited to 30. You can see the outline of the house as shown here. It's on Cougar -- I'll see it in the next one. No, I won't. Cougar Creek. Thank you very much. Off of Locust Grove Road just south of Ustick. And there is the arrow. You can see that the subdivision is built out. This is the -- north is headed this way for a reference point. So, here is Cougar Creek Drive on the south end of the property. The parking would be located in this area. Here is the side buffer. This is the garage from the house that would still be a garage and be able to accommodate two vehicles. And, then, this is the house and this is the play yard in the back. I'm going to go right to the P&Z recommendation, so I can kind of summarize some of the testimony that we heard in the previous hearings. This does come forward with a recommendation for approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. The 0 riginal recommendation from staff was for denial based on the need -- the lack of adequate parking, primarily, in the front area. There is a note there from Ms. Kirkpatrick regarding the recommendation. It says at the September 2nd, 2004, hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of the CUP application for Condra Steeves and adopted staff comments as part of their motion to approve the CUP. Staff comments did recommend denial and we did not include conditions of approval. Since it was clearly the intent of the Planning and Zoning Commission to recommend approval of the CUP application, staff just submitted a revised staff report that included conditions of approval, so -- and, then, we added the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission from there. So, they did not have the standard conditions of approval going forward into the hearing, but we did add those for this hearing. At the Public Hearing nine local residents testified in favor of the application. Three neighbors testified in opposition to the project, expressing concerns regarding traffic, noise, and the impact of the daycare center on property values. There was also quite a bit of testimony about other kinds of nonresidential uses in the area and I would imagine that that testimony will come up again tonight. The key issues of discussion were the potential impacts of the daycare center on the neighborhood; the logistics of the daycare center, just how people would get there, drop off kids and leave. And, then, landscaping of the subject property and parking on the subject property. They did recommend approval of the CUP. They also recommended that the applicant work with the city to obtain alternative compliance for Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 7 of 84 landscaping. That will need to bed one a sa separate application, but a t staff I eve!. They don't meet the required buffer on this side setback. That required area is 20 feet and due to site constraints and location of the existing residents, they are not able to provide that 20 feet. They have about 11 feet -- they are asking for a buffer of 12 feet. And then -- on the eastern edge of the property and, then, eleven foot six on the western edge. If I can get my -- there we go. So, they are asking for 12 feet there and, then, 11 feet six on this location. There was quite a bit of discussion about the three parking spaces at the front of the house and as to whether a variance was required for that or not. The standard residential setback is 20 feet. There is an exception for the -- for the residence portion to move forward to 15 feet. So, for a residence, the setback varies between 12 -- or 20 and 15 feet. In this case we have a conditional use going into this zone, so there is a question about what is the setback and that becomes important, because for commercial properties or for nonresidential uses, essentially, the required parking cannot be in the front setback. So, as they have shown their three parking spaces, they meet the 15-foot setback, but not the 20-foot setback. So, there was some discussion as to whether a variance was needed. The Planning and Zoning Commission felt that there wasn't and didn't recommend -- didn't forward a recommendation to Council that the applicant be required to get a variance. So, that was an outstanding issue before Council. And I think with that I will end my presentation and answer any questions that Council may have. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions for staff at this time? Canning: I do have the floor plan of the house. It's very difficult to read, but -- and there is the house. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here this evening? I notice you were sworn in. Nickel: I was sworn in, Madam Mayor. Thank you. De Weerd: State your name and address. Nickel: Shawn Nickle, 52 North 2nd Street in Eagle. De Weerd: Thank you. Nickle: Here tonight representing Condra Steeves and this application for a Conditional Use Permit. As staff has stated, your Planning and Zoning Commission did make a recommendation for approval of this application after a lengthy discussion and testimony, both in favor and in opposition. The applicant did, prior to submittal of this application, hold a neighborhood meeting, which they sent out 54 letters, of which two people showed up and they explained the process that they were going to go through for the Conditional Use Permit. Also, the property itself and the aspects of the Conditional Use Permit. The client also took a petition around, in which 49 of the residents on Cougar Creek Lane or Drive, including the homeowner association president and vice-president, signed in favor of the application. In addition, the Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 8 of 84 applicant submitted a petition with 103 signatures of past and present parents that have either gone through their daycare centers in other locations or are currently going through those centers. And in addition -- you should have all that in your packet. In addition to that there is also a letter from State Senator Bunderson and from a local businessman, all in support of this application for this use in this location. The actual use is a preschool, rather than a daycare, but it is being processed as a daycare center, because of the code. The applicant is not proposing any signage. They will be limiting the number of students to 30. The hours of operation will be 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. There will be three teachers at the -- at the facility, all licensed with the state. The reason for this location was because of its location and central -- its central location to the subdivision. Many of the potential children and parents can walk to this site, including one of the teacher's lives right down the street. Thus, that would help with any traffic concerns. I think that initially the Planning and Zoning Commission and staff had serious concerns about this request until they did find out the hours of operation and the fact that our parking can be contained on site and the testimony in favor of the application at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. ACHD has submitted a report stating that the traffic will not increase to a point that would make the street unsafe. There is an existing adult care facility adjacent to the property on the west. There are other commercial uses also within the subdivision. The neighbors on both sides of the property have submitted letters in your packet requesting approval and requesting that the alternative landscape plan that is appropriate and that we work with staff on -- on exactly how many trees and w hat kind of buffering we will do on that property. With that I will stand for any questions you have. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Shawn, you indicated that there are other commercial uses in the area. Where are those uses and what are those uses and are they permitted through a CUP or some other action? Nickle: The main one is the adult care facility, which is next door to the property. I don't believe that -- we went through this at Planning and Zoning and -- Rountree: It doesn't need a permit. Nickle: It doesn't need a permit, so -- I don't know if the other ones are legal uses or not. Home offices and smaller daycares. De Weerd: Any further questions? Bird: I have none at this time. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 9 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Nickle: Thanks. De Weerd: Okay. We have a number of people that have signed up for or against. If, when I read your name, you would like to come up to provide testimony or if it's just sufficient to read into the record if you're for or against. I have Deborah Schrader for. Would you like to provide testimony? Okay. I'm guessing Louann Falter. Okay. Sorry. I couldn't read it and listed as for. Amy Young for. Yes, please. Were you sworn in? Young: Yes, I was. De Weerd: Okay. If you will, please, state your name and address. Young: I'm Amy Young. My address is 20 -- De Weerd: If you will pull the microphone down. I'm sorry. Okay. Young: I'm Amy Young. My address is 2690 North Mildew Way. I am a patron of the preschool. My son attends there. My older son attended there. It is a preschool, so all the children that attend, attend in a two-hour block period, so they have -- the 30 students would be three different classes of ten students each. My son loves it dearly and we are looking forward to it being close to the neighborhood and I think it would be a wonderful addition to the neighborhood. I have -- I don't know if the neighbors that are, you know, opposed to it -- I brought a little -- the preschool makes up a little packet of the kind of things that go on with the children and a sample of what the preschool looks like and I have -- I have that if anybody would like to look at it. But my son's -- he's seven years old now and I brought it tonight to -- just in support of it, so -- De Weerd: Well, thank you. Corrine Arnell. For. Okay. Tish Davis against. Okay. Were you sworn in? Davis: I was. De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address. Davis: I'm Tish Davis and my current address is 12351 West Gregory Drive. But, however, I do have a house that is a rental on Stormy Drive, which is one road north of where the proposed daycare center is, and my backyard would, basically, butt up against their backyard, but there is a canal that runs in between those two sections of land right there. And I guess my biggest concern over it is the traffic, because people will enter to get to their home off of Locust Grove and, as you can see, there really isn't any place to turn around. They are going to have to go up and come back out and that will take them right down Stormy Drive. What isn't shown on this map is that section up there that looks like it's undeveloped -- Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 10 of 84 De Weerd: You have a pointer right there. Davis: Oh, do I? Look at that. Let's see. That section right there is being developed currently and they are cutting a road right there. I'm shaking. And so, then, that means that all of that traffic is going to be right down Stormy Drive, too, along with all the traffic from that daycare center. And there is a group home that is right next to where this proposed daycare center is going in and I'm just wanting to know how many more -- how many more commercial businesses are going to be allowed into that -- into that subdivision. I don't doubt that they are great people and that they are there to serve a purpose and I think that that's great, but as a homeowner, as a landowner, I am concerned about the traffic that it's going to bring into our neighbor. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Judy Alton against. If you will, please, state your name and address. Alton: Judy Alton, 1252 East Stormy Drive. De Weerd: Thank you. Alton: And I live on the same street that Tish was speaking about. My real concern is traffic. There is, as she said, the new subdivision going in and we are already going to be getting a lot of people coming through to avoid the stop sign at Ustick and Locust Grove to go to the subdivision. And people coming from the daycare center are probably going to come around and we have a lot of small kids riding their bikes up and down the street and that's a lot of traffic to be added. Also, just our home values. If we are adding more and more of these type of properties, I think that people would generally choose not to live next door to a business in a neighborhood and those are really my chief concerns. I have no doubt that these people are great and that they run a wonderful preschool, but I think that because of the traffic concerns that it is an issue that I would rather not see. De Weerd: Thank you. Steve Alton signed up against. Would you like to provide testimony? Okay. S.Alton: My wife usually says everything for me, but I just want to point one thing out. De Weerd: If you will state your name and address. S.Alton: Steve Alton, 1252 Stormy Drive. De Weerd: And were you sworn in? S.Alton: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council October 5. 2004 Page 11 of 84 S.Alton: The same concerns, obviously. When we moved in four years ago, we moved into a neighborhood that we recognized would have additional traffic based on -- see if I can get this to work. Based on the fact that that area was undeveloped and with this road right here going through to Ustick, that when that was developed it was, obviously, going to be easier for cars to come through to avoid the light both going to work and, then, the traffic flow back, cut through a gain to avoid this intersection. What wasn't mentioned is that I went over and counted the number of lots that are developed and they are just starting to build in this area right here and there are 60 lots. So, they are typical family homes, which they are. There is two cars per home, so that's a potential of 60 automobiles just on that alone coming through our street and diminishing our -- excuse me -- the peace that we bought and the property value that we acquired. So, to put a commercial building -- or commercial development there and put more cars down our neighborhood is only going to diminish our value further. So, we are strongly opposed against it. De Weerd: Mr. Alton, in that subdivision that's being developed, do they not have an access onto Ustick? S.Alton: They do have an access onto Ustick, but most people like to go take the route of least resistance, so rather -- their option is to go to Ustick, come to a light, wait for the light, and, then, go this direction or this direction. Locust Grove traffic is picking up and most people want to get down Locust Grove to Fairview, to Eagle, to the freeway, whereever they are going. So, the natural cut through -- and we are seeing it now. I mean there is no homes being lived in right here, they are just being built, but we are seeing increased traffic through that route down our street now from no homes and no families living there. It's just people that have figured it out. They can get through there quicker i neither direction than going u p to the I ight a t Locust G rove a nd U stick and waiting for a left-hand turn, Locust Grove to Ustick, or a right-hand turn going the opposite direction. So, it's becoming a known cut through. When the homes are built there and 60 more cars are in play, it's going to be a freeway, let alone 30 more cars throughout the day. So, the property value. But there is one more thing that I want to bring up. The way that thing has been handled, we were having dinner one night when a young lady showed up at our front door and kind of explained that they were going to do a daycare, with no details, and we thought, well, that's great, somebody trying to make a living with the daycare, we didn't have any -- and they asked, you know, if you had a problem with that, that there was opportunity to get involved. We gave it no consideration and thought that's not a problem, four or five kids in the neighbor, typical daycare. That's the last we heard of it. We got no petition. We had no invitation to a meeting. The only thing that we had was a notice in the mail that this meeting was going to occur tonight and, then, we saw in that -- in that notice that they were intending for the 30 to 40 kids. So, I read the minutes from the last meeting today and I found that most of the neighbors -- it said in there that most of the neighbors -- and the reason that zoning was giving the recommendation that it be okay was because most of the neighbors are saying it's fine. However, I don't know that most of the neighbors really understand the full impact of what's being proposed. We certainly didn't until we got Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 12 of 84 that notice and I don't know that others do. If -- I would like to submit, if nothing else -- I don't know what the meeting tonight is for, if it's for a final approval or what -- De Weerd: Yes. S.Alton: Is it? I would like at a minimum suggest that -- I'd like to go around and talk to my neighbors and see if they really understand the impact of this and if they have been given the opportunities that we have been given. I don't think they understand what's going on, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Jeremy -- I will mutilate your name, so I will just call you Jeremy. Or Jerome. I'm sorry. I already mutilated your name, didn't I? Signed up against. Would you like to provide testimony? Thank you. Okay. Trina Savoy. Thank you. I didn't notice that I swore you in. Savoy: You did not. De Weerd: Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Savoy: Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. If you will, please, state your name and address. Savoy: Okay. Trina Savoy. My address is 2136 East Clarine and I live 9/10ths of a mile away from the proposed preschool and I do want to reiterate it is a preschool with a very strong curriculum, preparing children for kindergarten. This is my second year attending Mrs. Steeves' preschool. My intention is to walk. A lot of the children are car pulled. The majority of them. There could be a potential problem now with where it's located and she's done such a good job of making sure that groups of children are coming in at the same time, we are not having 20 cars coming in at once. It's very well managed and handled. And I believe -- I'm not positive, but I believe that that sign that was posted did state the details and the number of children, the sign that was posted in front of that house about the meeting and the number of children that were going to be attending. So, that might be something you want to check on, but I'm pretty sure. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Staff, do we know what the sign said? When those are posted does it list specifics about the application? Canning: We should have a picture of it. Let me check. It should read just the same as this one here. Generally the same wording. De Weerd: Okay. While you look at that, I'll go ahead and continue. Brian Conner signed up against. Thank you. Were you sworn in? Conner: Yes, I was. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 13 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. If you will, please, state your name and address. And you can pull that up. Conner: Okay. Brian Conner. I live on 2797 North Snow Goose Way, Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Conner: Basically, my house is one -- one house and one street away. I live in Hunter Point Subdivision. A long with t he concerns that have been v oiced tonight a bout the increased traffic and things of that nature, I think my -- one of my major concerns and something that hasn't really been stated, is the kind of commercial creep into R-8 zoned residential areas. Council member Rountree already kind of touched on it tonight when he asked how many other conditional use permits do we have in that area with some sort of commercial use. And so the more we allow this, the more it sets a precedence for other people to have businesses and I think -- I really doubt that some of the people that live in this area would have bought their house if there was a daycare or preschool facility, whatever you may have, right next door to them or if their houses may have appraised at the same rate. The only time this kind of commercial creep really benefits anyone is when you're one of the last residential homeowners standing and everything else has finally valued up, because it is all business, everything has been totally restructured. You look on any house in Boise on Broadway, Fairview, something like that, that's right next to all the commercial creep, those houses are fairly run down, they are not worth much anymore, unless you can rezone it and sell it as commercial. So, I just kind of -- I think this kind of commercial creep is subject to what the original zoning intent was for these areas and I don't think we need the increased traffic either. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Don Jensen has signed up in support. Would you -- okay. Melinda Jensen in support. Okay. Jack -- I'm sorry. Jack Savoy. Okay. He's in support. Gwen Blakeslee. In support. Blakeslee: Hi. De Weerd: If you will, please, state your name and address. Blakeslee: Gwen Blakeslee, 2550 North Bobcat Way. De Weerd: Thank you. Blakeslee: And I have a daughter who is in her second year with the preschool at their location on Under and I'm in a car pool with another student and I would really appreciate having another facility closer. It would cut d own on my, you know, eight minute drive to about -- either walking or a one minute drive, because I'm in the neighborhood adjacent to it. And I have two other children that would benefit from having a quality preschool close by. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 14 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Is there anyone else who would like to offer testimony? If you will, please, state your name and address. Steeves: Condra Steeves, 7035 North Under Road. De Weerd: Were you sworn in? Steeves: I was not. De Weerd: Okay. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Steeves: It is. De Weerd: Thank you. Steeves: I just wanted to clarify a few things. What they are saying about traffic, we do come in car pools. The way that it works is we have three classes that would be attending. They would come at 9:00,9:15, and 9:30. With my 9:00 o'clock class there would be four cars coming in and out. With my 9:15 there is five and with my 9:30 there is five, maybe six. That doesn't count the people who are in walking -- I mean it does count the people who are in walking distance. Can they stand? De Weerd: You bet. Steeves: People who are within walking distance. Oh, there was going to be more of them. There is at least 11 who are within walking distance who will be there. There has been a neighbor who has asked us not to make u-turns, so I have talked to the parents about pulling into the driveway, backing out, and, then, going back out the same street. They don't even know Stormy exists without this map here. I mean I'm sure they could figure it out, but they didn't -- I was planning on them using East Cougar Creek. We have walked East Cougar Creek, we have got all their signatures, the people who -- no, there is two people on the street who we don't have their signatures, but 99 percent I would say. We have walked that whole East Cougar Creek Drive and they are all okay with it and they understand. They have seen the sign. The sign says 30 to 40 children. But we have gone to them and explained how they will be coming in. The other thing is R-8 zones are zoned for commercial uses, but our preschool will not have signs, it's bought in our names, so it is a residence, it is not a commercial building. Anyone driving down in the evenings wouldn't know what was going on. So, it will stay looking as a home, up kept as a home, and since we are buying it as a husband and wife, it won't change property values at all. No one will even know that it's a preschool. During -- from 9:00 to 3:00 is when we operate, so when they are out with the children and in the evenings with families, it will be dead quiet and there will be no traffic from us. I think that was all of the issues from there. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 15 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Council, do you have any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I have none. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Mrs. Steeves, if I could just ask a question. My question is why this particular location? Steeves: I have about 60 people within a mile radius who would like to go there. The location was looked at, there was actually a home farther down we looked at and the parking wouldn't facilitate. This one has room for three cars double deep. So, if I have six people dropping off, they can all fit in the driveway and not on the road. That was one reason. The square footage works very well and it's that quiet. We are very quiet. Our children are in classes of ten with a teacher, all supervised, it is educational, no kids are running around or anything, so it fits very well in neighborhoods, which I target. The parents who come want an in-home feel for their children's first experience at schoof. We provide that in-home feel, plus keep it just -- so that area -- I was targeting that area and, actually, the homeowner came to me and said -- who is a person that has children in the preschool and said we are wanting to move, would you look at our home and see if it would work. There is plenty of people right around who would like that. So, we did do the research we did do that. Also, with the other people, mailers were sent out by Meridian city and by -- for this one. This is the second hearing. They got the mailer for the first hearing that explained the 30 to 40 children; it has the exact same wording. So, everybody on Stormy -- this is their second mailer and I was the nice lady that knocked on the door and handed them an invitation to a neighborhood meeting where I would explain all of this. We only had two people show up. But that was an invitation when we talked to them, was handed to them, please come to the neighborhood meeting, so I can explain all this. Wardle: Madam Mayor, follow up? De Weerd: Okay. Wardle: I guess my question was this Council has seen and approved just recently a lot of office along -- if I can have the map of the neighborhood. Yeah. Just along Locust Grove to the south and, then, up into here and so I heard you say that an in-home feel is important to your needs. You didn't consider a use in -- such as a low office or-- Steeves: No. No. We would not have the clientele we have. They come to us for an in-home feel. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 16 of 84 Wardle: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is the testimony you are about to give the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Freeze: Yes. Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. Freeze: Melissa Freeze, 4650 West Big Creek Street. De Weerd: Thank you. Freeze: And I just want to say I have been at home for four years, but I taught for six years in the Meridian district, three at Under Elementary and three at Chaparral and when I looked for a preschool I was pretty p icky a nd I was very impressed with her setup and I did like the in-home setting and it takes the cost down, plus it's clean. And I have been really -- like I said, I'm really picky and I was the room mom last year, so I was very careful about watching and being in there and she runs a very tight ship. She does not let her kids get out of control and if there is a problem, she takes care of it right away and I do not foresee any problems as far as other property being destroyed or kids climbing fences or whatever. There is -- in our class it was a one-to-eight ratio, which is a really small ratio. I don't know if you have checked other preschools around town, but most of them are one to 15 or 18, sometimes with a helper. And the other thing is -- is I know that they are concerned about traffic, but I wanted to reemphasize that the morning sessions are usually like from 9:00 to noon at the latest and, then, my son is in the afternoon session and he gets out at 2:45. And I know that that's before people are home from work and also before kids get home from school. So, I know that if most people in that neighborhood are working, they are probably leaving at 7:00 or 8:00 and that's, really, before any of the moms come and, then, when you get home at 5:00 or 6:00, they will be gone. Kids -- my son's home at 3:00 every day. And it's not a daycare, it's -- I was very picky about that. I wanted it to be a preschool. So, you either sign up for the morning or afternoon and, then, that's it. So, I just want to emphasize that [ think it's not going to be an issue, because they will probably be at work when people are dropping off and car-pooling. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Were you sworn in? Kendrick: No. De Weerd: Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Kendrick: Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 17 of 84 Kendrick: Santha Kendrick, 1076 East Cougar Creek Court. De Weerd: Thank you. Kendrick: And I only live about six houses down and I have space for six cars -- well, five, because I have my car. So, we can use my area if we need for cars. I'm very willing to do that and I'll walk down myself, so I won't need to drive. But I'm very willing to, you know, give up the area if we need to use that to allow their preschool in and I have had my son there for three years and it's excellent, it is a very fun and very good program and my second son is turning -- he just turned three, so I'm excited to have one so close. But, anyway, I -- like I said, I will be walking down there myself and if they need extra space I definitely have enough to fit all of them. De Weerd: Thank you. Kendrick: Thanks. De Weerd: Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Perry: Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. Perry: I'm Stephanie Perry, 1258 East Cougar Creek. We are the current homeowners of the home and I also have had my children in the preschool. This is the fourth year. I have had three children go through there. I just want to say that it's a wonderful preschool. Obviously, I keep my children in and for both years -- three and four years. I also wanted to bring up -- I understand a lot of people are concerned about the traffic, which is understandably so, but, like she said, there is going to car pools, the preschool that she currently runs, I know there is several car pools that go through there, but I also wanted to say we have a lawn care and sprinkler company and we have two employees that run that and we personally give a lot of traffic to the road. So we are -- we need to move, we need to expand and get a bigger house, because I feel there is -- you know, we have two trailers, three vehicles, and, then, our two employee vehicles, along with my two brother-in-Iaws that come and help run the company. So, with that traffic coming in and out, you know, I feel that the business -- going into a business, I don't know if the neighbors will notice so much of a difference with us gone, because, currently, like I said, we have a lot of -- a lot of trailers and vehicles in our area in our home, so -- De Weerd: Thank you. Council, any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 18 of 84 De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Do you have a Conditional Use Permit to operate a business in that neighborhood? Perry: No, we don't. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Any new testimony? Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? D'Hadley. Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. D'Hadley: My name is Karen D'Hadley. I live on 706 West A shby. I have been a teacher at S mall Hands Preschool for six years and I -- it's a wonderful program. I started there when I was going to school at BSU. I had many great teachers, professors, doctors, that helped me and Condra Steeves progress this preschool to the point that it is. I consulted with them hours and hours and they helped me and Condra to make it a wonderful program. But what I really wanted to express was our parents -- people are worried about the traffic and worried about people rushing, but our parents and us love our children. They follow the speed limit. They are careful. They are safe. Our children are the most important things to us in the world and we wouldn't ever put them in danger and they are very good about keeping the laws of the road and very considerate drivers and they do come in car pools. I have one class -- or I have three classes I only have four cars coming in with ten kids. So, traffic is low and they do follow the speed limit and are very careful and I think that's all. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there any further testimony? Were you sworn in? Bohrn: Yes, I was. De Weerd: Okay. If you will, please, state your name and address. Bohrn: My name is Donna Bohrn and I live at 1451 North Santa Rosa Place. De Weerd: Thank you. Bohrn: And this is something dear to my heart, too. I mean it's not about a variance, it's about -- it's kind of the same issue, except for mine is not quite as big. But I just wanted to come and say that when -- comments about when people are looking to buy a house in a neighborhood like this and stuff, when do they mostly go out? They go out on the weekends, they go out in the evenings after work. This type of a preschool is not going to see the type of traffic or kids out playing during those times. I don't think it's going to Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 19 of 84 have any effect of the value of -- in the neighborhood on houses. The next issue I'd like to bring out is that it is a structured environment. Preschools are a little bit different than daycares and I know for a fact that preschools and daycares -- slash preschool daycares that I have gone to around here seem to think they are grouped together and they are not. When it's just a preschool, it's just a preschool. It's very structured. They go from one center to another center, there is not any yelling, they are to use their inside voices. It's not like -- it would be like even better than your own kids behaving at home. If you had five to ten kids of your own, you would probably have a lot of noise going on throughout the day. Whereas with these preschoolers, there is not much noise at all, because they are talking in human voices, they are not yelling, they are not screaming, they are not running around with guns, they are learning, you know, like our kids do. You know, that's what I mean the gun comment, because usually they have squirt guns or running around, you know, when they are out playing. But when they are in school they are not allowed to do that. It's structured. So it is a structured environment, so the noise and stuff is very limited. When they do go outside, they don't go outside for two or three hours, they are out there for maybe 15, 20 minutes at a time and it's, again, structured play. There is the sandbox. There is the swings. They are not running around causing all kinds of chaos. The next thing I'd like to point out is that usually the parents that bring their children to us are strictly day -- or a preschool environment c are a bout their children enough tot ake 0 ut the time tog 0 to it. They usually don't work. If they do work, they have somebody, like a family member or a friend, deliver their children or a car pool. They are not in a rush. They don't have a job to go to. This is their job. They are parents or friends or family that are helping get these children to their education start. The next issue is the last one and I will be quiet. I feel t hat a subdivision would benefit from home businesses, because you probably have all experienced it yourselves, the traffic is getting crazy everywhere, the time it takes to get from one point to another point is going up. Just myself, I live four miles from Wal-Mart, when I go to Wal-Mart it used to take me like eight minutes, now it takes me 15, you know. So, those types of things cut into our time with our family and family is a big issue with me. I would have more time with my family. So, if we had these little places, like daycares, preschools, nail salons, home businesses that are -- have something to do with like selling candles, baskets, perfume, makeups, whatever, it helps us as parents that choose to stay at home and do that during the day, to just be right around the corner to walk to it, to just jump in the car and go two miles versus eight down the road. I think it's a benefit to a subdivision, especially if it's handled in a decent way, which is like they were saying, there is not going to be any signs, so I don't think that it would be an impose on the neighborhood or bring down the value. Thank you. De Weerd: T hank you. N ow I don't even have to ask, dol? 1st he testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Bodily: Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 20 of 84 Bodily: My name is April Bodily, I live at 2728 South Sims Place in Meridian, and I just wanted to stand tonight and put on record that I am in support of this. My children have attended Small Hands Preschool for three years. It's an interesting thing. If you know Condra, which I guess you guys don't have that fortunate of knowing her, but this preschool started just in her home with probably six kids and Condra is a woman who loves education and she's great at it and it has grown, not because she wanted to make money, not because she wanted to have centers all around the Treasure Valley, but because she loves children. She teaches them well and you would not believe the parents that call day and day -- day after day wanting to get into this program. It is like no other. It is also affordable, which is very hard to find, because Condra is not out to make a living off of this. She is out to help these children. One small known fact also is that Condra does scholarship many children and has quite a few classes where parents pay very little, because they can't afford this sort of thing and wouldn't get it any other place. I know these parents help out in other ways that they can by, you know, doing some of the task work at home and stuff like that. So, I guess I just wanted it to be known this is not about a business. And another little known fact -- I was at the last hearing -- is that if this CUP does go into effect, it is with Condra only, it doesn't stay with the home or the property. Somebody else can't come in and do this if she sells it. One more thing I want to say is every time you will hear Condra say, oh, the parents will just come in and park there and turn around and leave, it is the truth. She runs a tight ship in the sweetest way and the parents listen. They do love their children. They love Condra. They are happy to have their children here with these wonderful teachers in this educational environment and you will see everything that she says happen. There will be many children walking. I have now started to sort of work in this preschool, which is amazing, because I said I would never do anything like that after I got rid of my children into school. But it's because it's just amazing. You're taken into it. It's quiet. I do go down into the basement of her center now and you would not believe that there are 30 children there, because it is absolutely quiet. They are learning and they are loving it. So, I just wanted that to go on record tonight. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. I'm sorry you've already testified. Is there any further testimony? Okay. We do give the applicant an opportunity to rebut. Canning: Madam Mayor, before the applicant comes up to rebut, I did want to just point out a couple 0 f things from the staff report and some 0 f the commitments that have been made by the developer that are not reflected in the conditions of approval. If you look on page four of your staff report, you will notice that there is three items listed there as special considerations, but because they were not -- as I mentioned before, there was a recommendation for denial that was taken forward to the Planning and Zoning Commission, there were no conditions of approval. So, these are just special considerations at this point. The first one deals with the landscape buffer. I do think it would be appropriate to add a condition of approval, if the Council decides to approve this application, that the applicant be required to obtain alternative compliance prior to occupancy of the structure. The second one is a commitment by the applicant to put up a nonclimbable fence along the Onweiler lateral, which abuts the property to the north. Again, I feel that would be an appropriate condition of approval. And, then, Mrs. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 21 of 84 Steeves testified that there was room for six double-parked vehicles. I did want to point out that there is just five and that's why staff has said that they only meet the parking requirements for the 30, not for the 40. Again, that's two in garage and, then, three across the face of the property. The other commitments that we have heard tonight from the applicant and the application's staff have been car pools, off-site parking, walking, and no u -turns and although these have been offered, these -- typically we don't put these as conditions of a pproval, because there would be no way for us to enforce those in any effective manner. So, I just did want to point those out, in case the applicant wanted to talk about any of those in their rebuttal. De Weerd: Thank you, Anna. Okay. Just restate your name and address. Nickle: Thank you, again, Madam Mayor and Council Members. Shawn Nickle. There are basically three issues this evening. I think that the character of Mrs. Steeves has been well add ressed and sol don't need tog 0 further into that. Those 0 ther - - the issues are traffic, the noticing of this -- of this use to the neighborhood and, then, the commercial use itself. In the red, that's what the sign said. As you know, those are very large, white signs. It's been up for about two months and it specifically said 30 to 40 children. It even gave Condra Steeves' phone number for personal contact, if anyone had any questions, if they are right out front, you couldn't miss it. The petitions that you have in your packet and the letters I think support the immediate neighborhood that Condra's intending to impact in that it's always been her intention to not impact the rest of the subdivision, other than what's coming in off of Locust Grove. So, I think that's important to understand. As far as safety and traffic, again, I think what really impressed the Planning and Zoning Commission was the hours of operation, the 9:00 to 3:00, the fact that this is a -- not a daycare, but a preschool, so it follows the same hours and times of year that a normal school -- in other words, they are out for summer, just as the school kids would be. So, you're not going to have that conflict during the week of children out playing w hen cars are coming and going during that Monday through Friday time period. Yes, this is a commercial use. There may be other commercial uses in the development, they mayor may not be allowed. We are doing the right thing in coming to you and asking for approval of this application. I can't speak for the people who mayor may not have done t hat, but we are doing that. T here is conditions of approval that you can place 0 n this t hat I believe will help lessen the impact 0 n the neighbors. The testimony you heard from neighbors just in the general area, I think, show that this is a needed use in this type of subdivision. Council member Wardle brought up why don't you -- why can't you use an existing office and I think Condra did a good job of explaining she's looking for a more personal type of facility, one that's within the subdivision that you don't have to necessarily drive to if you don't want to. One of her teachers lives right down the block and would walk to the property. You're not going to be located on an arterial street, so, you know, safety and noise would come into play -- or would not come into play. Staff explained the screening and fencing, which we have agreed to. Of course, the condition that this application -- this approval would stop with Mrs. Steeves and would not go to another buyer of the property in the future and, then, very quickly, the issue of the variance that was brought up with staff, Planning and Zoning did not recommend that we get a variance. However, just so you know that by Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 22 of 84 asking for the variance we are not asking for -- in other words, there is plenty of room to park to turn around cars and to provide a required parking without blocking any sidewalks or blocking any traffic when cars come in and out to drop off their kids. So, I think it's real important, the staggering of the children when they are dropped off, the hours of operation, the Monday through Friday. The neighbors have been, I think, fully noticed of this application and we have had neighborhood meetings -- they are well informed, I do believe, and that's why I think you got the lack of testimony from those neighbors on Cougar Creek, it was because of that extra effort that Mrs. Steeves went through to inform them. I think that's all I have to say. I'd love to answer any questions you have. De Weerd: Council, do you have any questions? No. Thank you, Shawn. Nickle: Okay. Thanks a lot. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you need any further information provided by the applicant or staff? Okay. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we close Item No. 10's Public Hearing. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 10. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I think the applicant is to be commended and there is certainly testimony here this evening for her abilities and her personal traits and any comment I might say from this point forward I don't intend to relate to that aspect of the application, but my concern is is that we have an, obvious, commercial activity that is being proposed to take place in an obvious residential neighborhood and that's evidenced by the fact of the variances, the exceptions, the inability to meet the ordinance requirements that we have established in the City of Meridian for commercial activities. It seems to me if I were a commercial activity coming to the City of Meridian and wanted to start a commercial activity and the city were to approve these kinds of things, I would seek the Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 23 of 84 sanctuary 0 f an R -8 subdivision a nd a void a number 0 f those things that we require applicants and folks that do come to our city to establish businesses and run businesses. Again, I understand the desire of the folks to have a close -- I think I thoroughly understand the abilities of Mrs. Steeves, but I have an issue with the commercial -- an obvious commercial activity in an obvious residential setting. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: My comments are much along the lines of Councilman Rountree's. I would like to say that I am impressed with the fact that so many people have come in support of this person's individual business and the way they conduct their business and certainly believe that all of those things, car pooling, walking, and understand that all of those would be part this application, but we have commercial areas for a reason and I think this is -- this is an example of something that would fit into a neighborhood center. [t is a neighbor business and we do have -- even in this area not very far up the street a neighborhood center with some approved commercial zoning in areas and so I -- just the exceptions being made here I feel are more appropriate, from our Comprehensive Plan, in a like area with other businesses. And so I just wanted to say that as my personal opinion, but, again, that this is certainly not any type of indication as to the character of the applicant or the business itself. De Weerd: Okay. Any further comment? I would offer another perspective and I would agree that in some regards the parking and the drop off has some issues to it, but I brought my kids to an in-home preschool setting and it does serve a function. Certainly, the traffic and the parking and drop off type of situation could be better, but I'm impressed with the fact that the neighbors that live on this street are not opposing it and that they have done a good job in putting any concerns to rest in that regard. And so that's very impressive. [think that most neighbors see that as an asset and certainly it is an asset and why it's allowed in an R-8 is to provide a service to the neighborhood and, yes, there are neighborhood centers for that, but not in these older parts before neighborhood centers existed. So, I do believe there is a use for it. There are some concerns on the drop off, but I -- and I do also believe in what Mrs. Steeves said is if you locate in a commercial area, your prices do go up, because you do have to cover the cost and the cost of the preschool and the hours are very low impact and that's probably why you don't see a lot of the immediate neighbors here to testify against it. And I guess ['II leave my comments at that. And there are illegal uses going on in our neighborhoods and the city does need to know about those, because they do require conditional use permits in the city and we don't advocate businesses operating illegally out of our houses, even in R-8 subdivisions. And group homes, just for the record, those are not considered a business, those are considered residential uses and we have recently done a lot of research on that, so I just wanted to put that for the record as well. Is there any further -- Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 24 of 84 Bird: Madam Mayor, I'll throw my two cents worth in here. I agree that I think that this is a very nice application. She's done a great job, sold the neighbors and everything. Her only problem is she come in to do it legally where, evidently, a whole bunch of them don't do it legally and I appreciate that very much so. I think she's got a very worthwhile business for that area. I don't believe the traffic bothers me that much, it's the fact of having -- if we set precedence and all our -- we are going to have commercial throughout our residential, which I don't think is a good policy. But I see nothing wrong with this as an application. I think she's done very well and it's -- the people being here speaks for itself how well she's done and the program she's put up and having seen grandchildren go through these preschools and stuff, they are very needed, very needed, and when you can -- you know, when you can pay three or four dollars a square foot against 12 to 15 you would in commercial, more people can afford to go. That's my thoughts. Rountree: So, are you going to make a motion? Bird: I probably wouldn't get a backing or a second. Rountree: Go ahead. Bird: But I will make it. I would move that we approve the CUP, the Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone for Condra Steeves and to incorporate staff, applicant, and public testimony. That's it. De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion to approve Item No. 10. Do I have a second? Okay. Motion fails. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we deny the request for Conditional Use Permit 04-029, request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone for Condra Steeves and the reason for the denial as I stated earlier in my comments in discussion. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to deny Item No. 10. Is there any further discussion? Rountree: I have none. Canning: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Anna. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 25 of 84 Canning: Do I get to play Bill Nichols? Since this is a Conditional Use Permit, usually Bill asks that you -- Mr. Nary can chastise me later if he wants to, but, generally, we ask that you give the applicant an idea of how they might be able to obtain approval in the future. De Weerd: And since I was just going to ask our attorney that, thank you. Canning: I'm sorry. De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: Well, the only position I heard Councilman Rountree indicate as -- that was the incompatibility of the commercial use in the residential zone. Is that correct? Rountree: Correct. Nary: And so I'm sure that there -- I'm not sure whatever other information the Council wants to include to allow the applicant that opportunity. I'm not sure what there would be. But, certainly, if Council has something, you can certainly provide that to the applicant. De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Madam Mayor, something of a smaller scale, something consistent with an ancillary use or the daycare provision that we have in residential areas for ancillary use in the -- I believe it's five to six children for daycare or school or whatever, require that the primary use of the facility be a residence, not a commercial establishment at a minimum. De Weerd: Okay. Is that enough for the record, Mr. Nary? Nary: Yes, Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Bird: Does the second agree? De Weerd: Does the second agree? Wardle: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Berg, will you, please, call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, nay; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 26 of 84 MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE NAY. Item 11: Public Hearing: AZ 04-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: Item 12: Public Hearing: PP 04-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 33 single family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 10 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: De Weerd: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Berg. Okay. Item No. 11 and 12 are related. I will open these two items, Public Hearing AZ 04-021 and PP 04-028. I will open with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is Arcadia Subdivision. It's a request for annexation and zoning of ten acres from RUT to R-8. The property is located just south of Jericho Road off of Chinden. There is a church, a school site, some -- four new residential lots -- five new residential lots, some existing larger homes, and you see the subject property here. This was the proposed Leeshire development. This is the Saguaro Subdivision as was recently approved. There is currently an existing home that will be removed. The proposed subdivision does have a number of connecting streets. This, again, connects up to Jericho and they have a loop. This is stubbed into the -- the former Leeshire development and this stub goes into Saguaro Canyon. The applicant is proposing 33 building lots and three other lots. The open space lots -- this is a -- a separation between the two homes there and, then, this is all open space at the center. There is also open space at the entrance here and here. The lots range in size from 6,540 square feet up to 12,493 square feet. The gross density of the project is 3.3 dwelling units per acre and the plat contains approximately 12 percent open space, which exceeds the five percent minimum required. This not a PUD, this is a straight subdivision. Just a moment, Mayor and Council, I'm looking for the recommendation sheet for the summary from the Planning and Zoning Commission. This does come forward with a recommendation f or approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission. One neighbor testified in favor of the application. Four neighbors testified in opposition to the application, citing concerns regarding traffic and the density of the subdivision. The key issues of discussion by the Commission were the stub streets to the neighboring properties and also the fencing along open space areas and pathways. We had asked -- staff had requested that micro-path landscaping standards be applied in this area, as well as all open space, which would mean that you could have a four foot solid and two feet of open lattice fencing in those areas and there was quite a bit of discussion. The applicant didn't want to be restricted to that. There was discussion about it along this property line and also along this lot line as well. The Planning and Zoning Commission did recommend that the micro-path landscape provisions be provided adjoining this large open space lot in the center. They also added a condition regarding the sewer easement. I'm going to let Brad handle that one. It's a sewer easement in the northeast corner of the subdivision and I think it was Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 27 of 84 related to recent developments between Leeshire and Saguaro, but those issues may have changed. And with that I'm going to let Brad update you. Watson: Madam Mayor and Council Members, I did have one revision to make to condition seven in the staff report and that change is necessary because of the denial of Leeshire. Condition seven, fourth sentence, this development will require a second water main connection to provide for better flows and redundancy within the system, which this can be accomplished through Leeshire Subdivision or Saguaro Canyon and we need to add the phrase: Or other adjacent property. It just takes the specificity out of Leeshire and Saguaro Canyon and as to the sewer easement condition that the Commission changed on the staff recommendation, that's fine. So, with that I think staff is done. De Weerd: Okay. Any questions for staff at this time, Council? Bird: I would have none. Rountree: None. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? If you will, please, state your name and address. McKinnon: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Dave McKinnon, 735 South Crosstimber. I know it might be shocking, we are not asking for a super-size subdivision tonight, we are not asking for -- De Weerd: Or variances. McKinnon: Or a variance 0 rap lanned development with the subdivision. This is a straightforward subdivision with a straightforward annexation. After annexation of the Saguaro Subdivision, which you recently approved, as part of Saguaro Subdivision's approval you required that they have a stub street in the northwest corner of this small piece of property, which we have provided for, and that will provide access out to Chinden Boulevard, which is a requirement that you made for Saguaro, so we are, actually, helping Saguaro meet their requirements that you suggested. I'd like to address Anna's comments real quick. First of all, I'd just like to take you through the subdivision really quick and explain to you the reasons why the subdivision is designed the way it is. Coming down off of Jericho from Chinden Boulevard there is currently a small house that sits right here with a lot of large landscaping trees surrounding that and rather than just trying to get rid of all the trees and jam in as many lots as we could, we decided to keep as many of the large trees that we could. Meridian doesn't have a great deal of trees and these are large mature trees, so we have tried to maintain and keep as many trees as possible, bringing the road through where the house was and there are a couple of trees that will have to go, but we have added quite a bit of open space, which will be landscaped to provide for additional trees. Coming into the subdivision, instead of seeing houses directly into the subdivision, you see open space, Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 28 of 84 as Anna pointed out. Actually, there is about 12 percent open space. Again, this isn't a PUD where we have to have ten-percent, we are, you know, by choice giving 12 percent open space to the subdivision. The reason for that is to try to create a different feel from the other standard subdivisions that you see in Meridian. Again, if you look at the subdivision, there is a stub street into Saguaro, a stub street into the -- I guess it's the untimely demise of Leeshire Subdivision, with Twilight Hush Avenue being the name, and coming back around and access back out to Chinden through there. The reason for the loop is to try to limit the amount of traffic coming in and out on one street. Anna pointed out a couple of small issues that were discussed quite a bit at Commission. The fencing issue -- and I'm going to probably lean on your new city attorney, Councilman Nary, just a little bit for some help on this tonight. The Planning and Zoning Commission at the meeting decided that because this was an open space area and the landscape ordinance does not address fencing for open space areas, it addresses micro-path areas only, they said that they would need to have a development agreement that says that this should be fenced in accordance with landscape ordinance, even though it didn't -- doesn't specifically say micro-path. There is no micro-path proposed for this area, it's just open space, and we said if a fence is provided, we will meet that requirement and so we felt that it would be something that could be provided without a development agreement. The only reason for the development agreement was to put in language to say that if fencing goes in on this area, it has to meet the requirements. We are more than willing to comply with that and put fencing in there, if fencing is put in and the neighbors, if they put fencing in there, choose to put fencing in, it would comply with that section of code for micro-path landscaping. So, I -- I want to call you commissioner, now Councilman, now City Attorney Nary, I need you to help us out with that. I don't want to take away work from him, but if there is a way to get around doing a development agreement and having to review a development agreement only regarding fencing, we think there may be a way out of that by just making it a condition of approval for the annexation, rather than going through a lengthy development agreement and having to go through that process. In addition to that, Brad Watson just briefly just touched on the sewer easement in this area. The reason for the sewer easement -- there may be some confusion there. Initially, the staff report from Ada County Highway District requested what would be considered -- and it's stated in their staff report -- as a quasi stub street in this location. In questioning Ada County staff as to what a quasi stub street is, they said, well, it's a place where you might be able to have a stub street in the future, if there is ever a need for a stub street, and in discussing with the Planning and Zoning Commission, there was an access to a school site here, there is an elementary school site just to the northeast of this project, with an access just to the north here, and Planning and Zoning Commission felt that there was no need for a stub street there, so they got rid of the requirement for the stub street in that place, so they said, you know what, in the future there may need to be a sewer extension coming through along this side, the east side of the project, so they said put the sewer stub right here and provide an easement across right here, rather than provide a stub street. And we have talked with the owner of the property right here -- Anna, if you can go back to the overhead, the aerial. There we go. This piece of property right here. We have talked with this property owner right here and he's agreed to allow us to stub to that piece of property, so in the future if it Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 29 of 84 develops, sewer can be brought to that piece of property, rather than on the street, but rather as a sewer easement and we are in agreement with that. The P&Z Commission didn't make an explicit statement that is reflected in the staff report, but the reason for the sewer easement there was to get rid of the requirement for a stub street, the quasi stub street as Ada County Highway District reflected that on their report. With that, I guess the major issues that the Commission had we resolved those with you. As you see in your staff report, there weren't any major issues left to resolve that they forwarded to you. There is still some time left, but I don't believe there is a great deal that needs to be discussed from me that you can't already see or that has been presented to you at this time and if you have any questions for me at this time and turn the time back to you. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: Go back to the overhead. How do you get into that property right now? McKinnon: Right now? We come in off of Jericho from Chinden Boulevard, which is the only access currently. Leeshire Subdivision, which was recently denied, which they are reworking 0 n, we provided a stub street to the south, a connection to Locust Grove. Saguaro Subdivision in its later phases will provide a stub street to here. But for right now there is one way in on Jericho and one way out. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any other questions? Bird: I have none at this point. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Go back to the plat, please. Thank you. The lot sizes that are adjacent to Saguaro -- McKinnon: The lot sizes -- Anna, if you can help me out, seeing it from your computer, if you can read those 0 r not real clearly. These are in the 7,000 to 8,000 range. I believe this is a 6,540 lot right here. Saguaro, as you remember, had smaller lots up on this side, and they reduced a couple of them to make them bigger, but they were, actually, the smaller size. Canning: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Rountree, they are -- that one is just about 7,000. That's 7,800,7,500, 7,500, 7,000, 7,500. These get bigger. 11,433 and, then, 10,000. Rountree: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 5. 2004 Page 30 of 84 McKinnon: Thank you. De Weerd: Dave, I guess I have a question as to -- I know this is an in-fill project, but why -- why at these densities? It's stuck in the middle of nothing right now, but why an R-8? McKinnon: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the R-8 zone affords a reduced lot frontage. If you get into densities, which we are dealing with 3.3 units to the acre, the Comprehensive Plan requests three to eight units to the acre and so, actually, the density is well on the shallow end of that, rather than trying to cram a large number in, there is actually less than what would be allowed in the R-4 zone. As you know, the R-8 zone affords for a variety of lot sizes and lot frontage dimensions. With a ten acre piece of property, without having a super-size subdivision to deal with large land masses and to be able to created the typical 80 by 100 lot, the R-8 zone affords the smaller lots, as well as the larger lots, without having to just go with the straight 80 by 100 lot you typically see in an R-4 zone, but as far as density goes, this falls below the typical R-4 zoning density. So, we are not asking for a large density increase for this area. This actually would fall within an R-4 zoning density, but it has a variety of lot sizes that wouldn't be allowed in the R-4. De Weerd: All right. I guess my last question would be why now when you're going to be putting this traffic out onto Chinden? McKinnon: Why -- how many -- De Weerd: Why are you wanting to develop now without the other accesses out onto the arterials, rather than Chinden? McKinnon: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the 33 lots, if you take the average daily trips, we are looking at about 300 vehicle trips per day and that's not a significant increase on Chinden Boulevard, which currently carries in the tens of thousands of vehicle trips per day. Leeshire Subdivision we had hoped that, you know, things would work out with the city at this time to provide a secondary access out. We can't control the speed of development with Saguaro Canyon. However, as you know, development is happening at a faster pace all the time. We believe that, you know, the 300 units out to -- 300 vehicle trips per day out to Chinden Boulevard would not significantly increase the amount of traffic on Chinden at this time. You will see a much greater traffic impact when Saguaro and the resulting development around this area develops to its fullest. This is, actually, just a small development, which will provide a small impact. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. ( Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 31 of 84 Rountree: I'm sure I have the answer here on my PC, but has this been coordinated with the district department of transportation? McKinnon: Yes. Rountree: And their comments were -- McKinnon: The comments were it's an existing access on Jericho; they are not going to shut Jericho down. Rountree: Any concern about left turn movements from Chinden into this area for safety on a two-lane facility? McKinnon: Madam Mayor, Commissioner Rountree, as you know, Chinden Boulevard for this area there has been studies that have been completed and there is a plan in the -- I wish I could say the very near future, but I can't say that right now, but to widen Chinden in the future and to provide additional lanes for Chinden. Chinden is a very large growth corridor and they plan on widening Chinden in the future. Rountree: Madam Mayor, if Dave will indulge me -- and this, really, hasn't -- question isn't specifically to do with this development, but in the past few months -- actually, weeks, we have seen this -- we have seen Leeshire and we have seen Saguaro and we have seen a couple other fairly large subdivisions in this general area. What could the city do to facilitate the various landowners that all of a sudden decided they want to develop, to get them together and master plan larger areas of land, as opposed to this ten acres, you have got five and seven acres to your west of this facility that's in this area that's going to -- who knows, in the next few weeks we might be seeing those as well. And I'm having a hard time making sense of all of these little incremental developments that are going on in this particular area. We haven't seen it so much in some of the other areas of the city, but right here it's -- it's going to be a jig saw puzzle before we are done and I'm not sure we are going to like what we are going to have. McKinnon: Boy, that -- Madam Mayor and Councilmember Rountree, boy, that's a tall order to answer in just a few minutes. Rountree: Just some insight, because you're working on that side of the fence. McKinnon: On this side of the fence now and having worked on the other side of the fence the last few years, there is a lot that can be done. The City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Department -- I know in talking with Anna and having worked in it, they are burdened at this time. The comprehensive planning process I think was probably the most appropriate process for handling this. There was a great deal of thought, a lot of community involvement that went through this in the last few years, where the community was gathered and the map right here, there was a lot of discussion as to how was this going to be developed and those people were brought together at the Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 32 of 84 same time in the same room. Comprehensive plans have a way of doing that. In recent discussions between yourself and other developers there has been discussion to revive the -- I guess what's now dead, the north Meridian plan. Under the north Meridian plan there will be a large group of people who are really very interested in finding out what would happen with their property. There was some discussion amongst the developers and amongst members of staff that the Comprehensive Plan needs some work in this area and one of the ways to do that would be to hold additional hearings to change that and that would be probably through the north Meridian plan. That would be the best way to get the groups of people together. As far as controlling the development, there is no way to control who is willing to pay what and how much and it's going to be very hard to determine which company would be the right company to gather everybody and to master plan for the area. However, the city itself can do master planning for specific areas. That was one of the ideas of the Comprehensive Plan was to provide for neighborhood planning in specific areas in the future, but that's something that takes time to do and it's hard to do that with a burdened staff. Rountree: Thank you. De Weerd: I guess, though, Dave, we do know that the Comprehensive Plan and the north Meridian plan don't offer the specifics I think that Councilman Rountree is talking about to see how it would connect and how we -- how all of these started fitting together and I realize that the other portions of the north Meridian area we've seen have been large tracts of land and so that has given us benefits seeing what the big picture looks like. And I would agree with Councilman Rountree, if there is a way that we can start pulling this together and seeing it in a larger -- even if it's one landowner at a time, but if we see the bigger picture, it does make for a better community plan. McKinnon: I would agree with that. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the Comprehensive Plan does address that. There is a need for neighborhood planning for specific areas. There is, actually, a goal statement in the Comprehensive Plan to provide for specific neighborhood design. I can tell you that this developer, as well as myself, I have met with the property owner to the northeast, the property owner to the south at Leeshire, Grant Lee, as you know I worked on the Saguaro Subdivision, this isn't something that's been piecemealed together, we have had some access issues we have had to work with. Leeshire Subdivision to the south, initially we had a different location for the stub street to the south, we have worked with them to provide the stub street there. We have worked with Saguaro to meet their stub street requirements. So, there is a great deal of interaction between developers to try to create that, but, as you know, in the free market economy that we live in, it's very hard to determine how many and how much the price is going to go for and what can happen until a master plan does happen and there isn't one yet. De Weerd: Thank you. McKinnon: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 33 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. We do have a Public Hearing. I do have one person signed up, Mark -- Mike, I believe? I'm sorry. Mark. Miller: Sorry I scribbled. De Weerd: Now have you been sworn in? Miller: Not -- I will. De Weerd: Okay. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Miller: Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. If you will, please, state your name and spell your last name, and provide your address. Miller: My name is Mark Miller, 1906 East Dunwoody Court. I just wanted to come up and actually kind of ask the Council to look again at the bigger picture of what's happening inn orth Meridian. I think the comments that you have already made a re completely appropriate. You can see -- can you just show the overhead aerial? You can see the issues in addition for what -- I live over here on Dunwoody, but the piecemeal approach to developing this area certainly brings up the issues that you have already talked about. This one is pretty small, but we look at this one and this one and wonder what in the world could somebody propose to try to jigsaw puzzle all these things in together. So, we had come to Planning and Zoning and asked them to please -- because even though this is medium density residential and their lot sizes actually fit R-4 zoning, that we have it zoned as R-4 and it at the very least would allow the rest of the things that fill in around here to have at least a better community. I think what we are worried about the most is the general community of this northeast part of Meridian and the way it's developing and we would love to have a master plan that would require everybody to get together. I think that should be possible. Obviously, there is financial interests other ways that are pressuring people to do other things, but we are talking about the community in 10,20, 30, 50 years from now and that's the whole reason for a plan is to protect the way things will be long in the future. The other reason I came today is -- can you put up the master city plan for me? Canning: The zoning map? Miller: Just the master city -- the future land use map. Do you have that? The same thing that's down here on the ground. Canning: Hold one. Miller: If you will notice -- it's hard to see here, but we talked about this at the Leeshire Meeting, there is a -- there is a multi-use pathway that my wife talked about, she's the Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 34 of 84 mother of f our kids a nd triplets and we walk all the time, we are planning on using, hopefully, this neighborhood center and the ideal situation will be here, but if there is not a plan to keep this multi-use pathway in this master plan, we may have a problem and you will notice that the multi-use pathway cuts the corner of this ten acre property and there is no alternative plan for the multi-use pathway. There has been a question as to whether you could connect through a -- through Larkwood Subdivision here, but there probably will be some real issues, possibly even legal, of getting a multi-use pathway through an already developed agricultural neighborhood. So, we'd love to have the continuity of the multi-use pathway, because we think it's important for the master plan of this northern area, it needs to be addressed. There is certainly an easy possibility to keep it connected as it follows the post -- the back end of this church property, requiring Leeshire and we just request that since -- if things do end up having to be piecemeal, that the master plan at least be followed the way it is and if we do decide to put an extra multi-use pathway in here, it would hurt nobody to have two multi-use pathways or an extra way for people to run or get to a park, but I think there just needs to be a larger picture evaluated and we would request that maybe we could make this into R-4 zoning, if -- we'd prefer to have everything develop around the same time or at least have some type of master plan and require the owners of the properties to make a little bit more of an effort to do something that's better for the city and better for the area, but I just -- I think what my wife wanted to -- let me come down and leave the kids, so we can put them to bed, was to tell you to, please, leave the master plan the way it is and, please, require these developers to put in things that are already amenities that are planned. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there any further testimony? Okay. McKinnon: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Mark hit on a couple really good issues and I'd just like to -- De Weerd: Just restate your name. McKinnon: Dave McKinnon, 735 South Crosstimber. De Weerd: Thank you. McKinnon: The micro-path -- I guess the large pathway system, as you will recall from a month and a half ago -- or maybe it was longer ago than that, the Saguaro Canyon Subdivision, there was a lot of discussion about the multi-use pathway and as you will recall, the multi-use pathway determined that coming off of the canal right here there was a large 100 foot wide landscape easement that was there and we decided to put in a ten foot wide pathway there, rather than a sidewalk. That was in lieu of the pathway coming up on this side of Larkwood. There is a ten-foot wide pathway going up through Saguaro Canyon Subdivision, up to the mid point. At the mid point there was discussion of taking that pathway, bringing it up with a six foot wide detached sidewalk from the center of the subdivision through Leeshire Subdivision to provide the access, rather than having the smaller -- it kind of comes up and around this direction to avoid Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 35 of 84 Larkwood. That way we would have a pathway that comes up, provides access to the school site, and to the site of the Ashenbrenner piece of property. In addition to that, there is a sewer easement that's hopeful to come through here and come through Larkwood. The pathway itself was intended to come through at this point with the sewer easement as well. So, there is a pathway already that was approved with the Saguaro Canyon Subdivision. So, the pathway is something that was addressed, even though Saguaro Canyon only had a minor portion of that. So, the pathway actually comes up and, then, runs through this direction all the way out to Locust Grove, rather than only having the single access way to the south on Locust Grove. So, that has been addressed. A couple other issues that Mark hit on is the hodge-podge and we have talked a little bit about that. In your Comprehensive Plan there is a number of policies that are listed. A number of those policies include interconnectivity, a variety of different housing types and that's what this is providing. There are some limitations with this site. It's ten acres. It does have some in-fill as you said, and we are trying to provide as best we can for those policies. If you can flip back to the overhead, again, Anna. I guess the -- the project. There we go. If you can go one more just into the subdivision. There we go. We tried to provide open space, a variety of different housing types. The open space requirement -- you know, we have provided more than what's necessary. This is a small piece of property. Provided three stub streets on ten acres, 12 percent open space, and we have tried to provide all the amenities that you would see in a bigger subdivision on a small subdivision. And, actually, more amenities with the open space. We feel that the attempts to keep the trees here to try to reduce the amount of work that your new attorney has to do by getting rid of the development agreement are all positive things. If there is anything that we can do to accommodate, you know, the greater area, we would try to do that. As you know, the development community all know each other and t hey work together. We feel that t his piece 0 f - - this piece 0 f property with the accesses to all the adjoining properties has met the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The 3 .3 dwelling units per a cre meets t he density requirements of t he three toe ight units per acre for the Comprehensive Plan and we'd ask for your approval at this time. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: ACHD has indicated that Jericho will be extended from the north of the property. What's the intent there? What's a typical section, what's the surfacing, what's the drainage, who is going to be responsible? McKinnon: Who is going to be responsible for the construction of Jericho all the way out? Rountree: The care and feeding of it once it's done. McKinnon: Ada County Highway District. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 36 of 84 ( Rountree: Okay. What's a typical section? McKinnon: What's a typical section? With the amount of vehicle trips, it would be probably a 36-foot street section, with a 50-foot right of way. T his is not a collector status street, but it is a local street. It doesn't fall in the half mile. Typically 36 paved. Rountree: Drained? That's all I have. Thanks, Dave. McKinnon: Okay. Thanks. De Weerd: Are there any other questions? Okay. Thank you. Okay. Council? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Just -- not to bring the other -- other developments into the concern of this, but one of the things that we heard -- and we have heard in past areas from neighbors and from some of the people around this is buffering and difference of lot sizes and I believe we had a conversation last week or several weeks ago that the difference between 6,200 square feet and 6,700 square feet was not a differential in lot size. And I do see this here. I see the difference between 6,500 and 12,000 feet and I see some buffering and so I would just like to point that out from my opinion of what -- what's different about this development versus some of the others that we have seen in the area. And the fact -- again, the fact that we are not seeing a PUD used to -- to try to create smaller lot sizes, to create different housing types, they have done that within the R-8 zone and kept the density down, so just some of my observations. De Weerd: Thank you. Staff, I know in the development to the south of this, the pathway was brought up. Has staff -- is it staff's recommendation to not carry that line on our Comprehensive Plan up through the property to the south, that it won't have an affect on this? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I suppose staff's recommendation is that it -- that it follow this sewer easement through this subdivision and connect up to Saguaro, but I would have to admit that it's a rather weak recommendation and the reason that we have gone back and forth on this is that that line is not following any natural feature and we have discovered that the -- that the quality of those open spaces is sometimes not all that great. They end up following just on -- into the sides of streets, because there is not a physical constraint to development in that area, they often end up just being on the streets and, actually, that's the way it was in Saguaro anyway, but it followed a linear pathway system, if you remember on Saguaro. So, it was kind of creating a little bit better of effect of pedestrian or bicycle atmosphere. We were very concerned that it wouldn't get passed the L DS church in this location, given that it's already developed. Coming up through here became difficult and, again, there is just Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 37 of 84 no natural feature for it to follow. The Saguaro one did come up and end -- I think right about where Mr. Grant's house is, even with it. So, it's kind of ended in this area. We had talked about continuing it on the street through Leeshire and, then, the neighborhood center is, technically, in this area. And Brad would like to add to that, too. Watson: Madam Mayor and Council Members, I guess I wasn't aware that anyone was considering a sewer easement for a public pathway. We are in negotiations with these property owners and Larkwood Subdivision and I very much expect that one of the limitations on their granting an easement, if they do, would be that the public not be walking through their side-yards. Just getting a sewer easement with gates on each side with emergency access only would be a bonus to me, putting aside the public pathway. That's alii have. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Watson. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Not seeing the parks director here, I will just have -- relate some of the discussions we have had in my work on the parks commission, on the pathways committee, and now as the liaison to the parks department and that is the fact that when looking at the master plan for the parks system and the pathway system, the overall idea was conceptual and so what we are finding is that by working with the development community at this point in time, the parks department is able to provide some connectivity and so just to talk about some of the things that Anna has mentioned, we are finding out within the pathways committee and that is that the lines were not always drawn on a natural feature, such as an irrigation ditch or some sort of an area that would just naturally be able to, with some work and cooperation with the irrigation district, be able to turn into a natural pathway for the community, so just offer that. De Weerd: Okay. Well, Mr. Wardle and Anna, I hope now that we have a transportation planner, that we start having a stronger master plan for these pathways, so we do know what the expectations are and how we are connecting up. The alternative forms and how we connect are important for our community and so it was a topic that was brought in the application to the south of this piece that seemed to still be unanswered and this is our only chance on this one. Canning: Madam Mayor, may I make a soap box comment, since I have a few developers captive, at least one of them. De Weerd: You bet. Canning: There is no reason that a pathway couldn't be built with a nice feel to it or a secluded feel to it, even though it's not following a natural feature. We have just not seen anybody bring one in so far. ( Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 38 of 84 McKinnon: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, just a few comments. That was a big issue for Saguaro. There wasn't any way for it to connect and so that's the reason why they brought it in up off of McMillan, was because there was no other way to bring it in, other than if it was coming in off of Leeshire, which, actually, doesn't follow the master plan, because the master plan for the pathway shows it much further to the south than coming in off of Leeshire, but we felt there should be an additional connection. That's the reason why it was to go through there. Brad pointed out accurately that the Larkwood Homeowners Association didn't want to have a pathway there, but we have provided within Saguaro the opportunity for that to happen if there was ever a desire for Larkwood to accommodate that and that's part of the reason that we did that. And, finally, just -- if you had had a chance to look at the ground truthing of the pathway system, there is two of them that I really enjoy within the Comprehensive Plan that I think you have all seen before. There is micro-path -- if you can go back to the Comprehensive Plan, Anna. My favorite one is the micro-path that goes across 1-84 and the micro-path that crosses Victory Road three times within a quarter mile. So, it gets to be a little awkward. Having worked on this Comprehensive -- right here it crosses one, two, three times in a quarter mile. None of them are at intersections, across a 50-mile an h our road. And this micro-path that crosses 1-84 is a personal favorite. The idea is to try to get those to come to happen, but they weren't ground truthed and that was a discussion that we have had and it's a discussion that we have had for years on this Comprehensive Plan is how are we going to get these to happen and so in order to accommodate some things, they accommodated the pathway to come up through Saguaro to provide access to the school site and provide access out to Locust Grove and, as you know in the future, as McMillan builds out on the north side you will probably see the pathway continue along McMillan, a larger pathway, because of the Lemp Canal that sits on the north side of McMillan. It doesn't provide for the easy access for sidewalks. De Weerd: Well, Dave, I think you have earned a berth on the pathway committee, since you have favorites, as you want to note. McKinnon: As you know, I'm happy to serve. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Council. Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Nary. Nary: There was the question about the development agreement Mr. McKinnon raised. In looking at the minutes it appears originally -- and I guess I wanted Mrs. Canning's opinion -- originally it appeared that the fencing issue was felt resolved by the staff by preliminary plat conditions and, then, the discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission seemed to, then, move to a development agreement and Mr. McKinnon sort of agreed with that, in having that, and I guess I'm unclear as to why that digressed, Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 39 of 84 even in looking at the minutes. Obviously, there is a concern about making sure they are site obscuring, that there is no sight obscuring fencing around that common area and along the micro-path, as well as the rest of the common area, but we have dealt with those before through preliminary plat conditions and we don't always do those two development agreements, so I guess I wasn't clear from looking at the minutes why it digressed to that. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Nary -- that's going to take awhile. You know, I -- in all honesty, I don't remember much of the discussion, other than the staff planner just had somehow brought it up, So, I don't feel strongly about it at all. I don't understand why we couldn't do it as a condition of approval. I don't know if she had gotten legal advice from White Peterson to the contrary, but I'm not sure on that Issue. Nary: Yeah. I read the staff attorney's comments there and I think it was the same thing, they seemed to get on this tack of having a development agreement, but, you know, it appears for that -- for that particular use -- or particular issue they wanted to be concerned with a plat condition that's adequate I think to meet the same desire, to make sure there is four foot fencing, if there is fencing. If there is less than -- it can be more than if it's non-sight obscuring. I think all of those can be down through the conditions of approval, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Council? Or do you need to -- good. I wasn't going to recognize you anyway. Nary: Quit when you're ahead. De Weerd: Is there something important you wish to add? Okay. Council? Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Hearing no more public comment, I would move to close the Public Hearing. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the public hearings on Items 11 and 12. Is that the motion? Wardle: Yes. De Weerd: Okay. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 40 of 84 Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Before I make a motion, Brad, you had mentioned that item number seven -- was your intent to remove the recommendation of -- or sewer through Leeshire and Saguaro Canyon and replace that with other adjacent property owners or to add other adjacent property owners? Watson: Madam Mayor and Council member Wardle, the latter. Just add other adjacent property owners, because without Leeshire they are stuck with Saguaro, which won't work. Wardle: And, then, another question for Mr. Nary. Mr. Nary, was the condition of recommendation placed to require a development agreement? Would we have to remove that condition and, then, add a plat condition? Bird: Madam Mayor, Councilmember Wardle, yes, you need to change those recommendations. Wardle: On both applications? Nary: Yes. Wardle: With that, Madam Mayor, I move that we approve AZ 04-021, annexation and zoning for Arcadia Subdivision, to remove the specific condition requiring a development agreement, to place in its place a condition that no sight obscuring fencing be placed near the micro-path or the open area and to change condition number seven requiring -- to add the phrase: Or other adjacent property in reference to obtaining sewer connection. Canning: Councilmember Wardle, the micro-path fencing that we had discussed earlier does allow four foot of solid fencing and, then, two feet of lattice. I believe your motion just said no sight obscuring. I just wanted to clarify is that what you -- is that what you really wanted? Wardle: Yes. As I recall, the developer agreed to -- to that specific fencing type, if the neighbors were to put the fences up. Canning: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Do I have a second? Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 41 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to a pprove Item No. 11 with the amendment as noted. Is there any further discussion? Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: If we move forward with this motion in an affirmative way, is it consistent with the recommendation and decision that we put forth on the Leeshire Subdivision? I can't remember exactly the reasons for denial of that and I want to make sure that we are consistent here. I think it had to do more with -- yeah, density and lack of a mix of lots. It was pretty -- it was either one great big lot or a bunch of little tiny ones. Nary: Madam Mayor, Council member Rountree, I believe that's correct. I don't know that we have seen those, have we? We haven't seen them, but you're correct, it was based on the fact there was one large lot, there was this division almost in the middle of the subdivision, you had all small lots on one side of it, that -- some of it was the density, but a lot of it was the design. Right. De Weerd: The green space. Nary: The green space was Mr. Lee's yard. Rountree: I just wanted to bring that out, so -- De Weerd: Okay. Rountree: -- get my memory refreshed. De Weerd: Okay. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg, will you call roll. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Okay. Wardle: Madam Mayor, I move that we approve Item No. 12, PP 04-028, preliminary plat for Arcadia Subdivision, to add to condition number seven the phrase: Or other adjacent property in reference to gaining sewer connection, to remove the condition for a development agreement and to add a condition which would limit specifically the fencing type discussed in the Public Hearing to the micro-path and the open space. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 42 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to approval Item 12 with the changes as noted. Any further discussion? Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Item 13 is Public Hearing VAR 04-006. ['II open this Public Hearing with staff comments. No. I'm opening the Public Hearing with staff comments. Thank you. Rountree: Can we take a break? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request for a variance-- De Weerd: Anna, I think we are going to take a ten-minute break per Council's request. (Recess.) Item 13: Public Hearing: VAR 04-006 Request for a Variance from MCC 11-10-6 to allow a childcare/preschool for five or fewer children to be operated in a required garage area of a single-family home in an R-4 zone for Earl and Donna Bohrn by Earl and Donna Bohrn - 1451 North Santa Rosa Place: De Weerd: I wil[ call this meeting back to order. Okay. We are on Item 13 and I will open the Public Hearing on V AR 04-006 with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- De Weerd: Oh, Anna, ['m sorry, just to note, we did receive a letter. The author of the letter did ask that it be kept confidential. When we receive letters from the public it is open to the public, so we don't have the choice to honor that. I just wanted to note that for anyone who might be curious in the public. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a variance to the code requirement that requires that every residential house have a garage capable of housing two automobiles. The subject property, as you can see, it's in the Vineyards Subdivision located off of Under and Cherry. It is also a developed neighborhood. I was going to run through some of the exhibits. This is the Bohrn's home and you can see t he two car garage door is still in p lace. The third bay of t he garage has been replaced with a window and a door -- with a door entry. This was the site plan that came in for the accessory use. Okay. I'm going to go back now and touch on some of the history of this application. Mrs. Bohrn applied for an accessory use permit in May of this year to operate a preschool for five or fewer children in her home and we did send out notice to abutting property owners about the proposed use and we published in the Statesman and there were no 0 bjections filed within t he allowed time period. When Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 43 of 84 staff had taken in the application, at first glance it appeared that these asterisks are the locations where the preschool would be going on and it was our understanding that the preschool would be in that third bay of the garage, not in the entire garage area. Prior to approval of the accessory use permit Ms. Allen went out to inspect the facility and was -- unfortunately, had to tell Mrs. Bohrn that she could not use the whole garage, that she still needed to have a garage capable of handling two children -- or two cars. Excuse me. Had we known that in advance -- which often happens when accessory use permits come in, the garage is often where they do want to have the use occur and we tell them right off the bat that it can't -- you still have to have a garage for your home, that where there is a third bay of the garage, you can use that third bay for an accessory use permit, such as a home occupation or a day care for five or fewer children. The Bohrns are now, as I said, asking for a variance to allow them to use those -- that garage as -- the full garage as the preschool area. Upon notice to the surrounding property owners, we did get several objections this time, mostly in regard to the use of the daycare being operated out of the garage. The reasons for the objections were a business in the home is against CC&Rs, the preschool would create additional traffic, which would be a hazard to pedestrians and autos, concerns about the impact on property values of adjacent homes, another child care facility not needed due to the two existing facilities in close proximity, on-street parking and safety concerns for children being dropped off or picked up and the potential noise created by children. Staff was not able to make the findings for denial, so the staff recommendation is -- I mean -- excuse me. Staff was not able to make the recommendation to approve the variance or not able to make the findings for the variance, so we are recommending denial. And I will leave that as staff's presentation. De Weerd: Okay. Council, any questions for staff a t this time? Okay. Would the applicant like to come forward? And I know you have been sworn in. If you will, please, state your name and address. Bohrn: My name is Donna Bohrn and IJjve at 1451 North Santa Rosa Place. De Weerd: Thank you. Bohrn: I am aware that you probably have the packet that has all the complaints and stuff like that, is that true? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Bohrn: Okay. One of the things I'd first like to start off with is I thank you for listening to me tonight, taking your time to make this decision. I have been dealing with this since May and I'm very passionate about this. I came from Nevada a year ago and I ran a very successful business out of my home in a subdivision there. I ran through over 120 kids through my program and got them prepared for kindergarten. I just want to start out in my home, because I'm unfortunate where I can't go out and rent retail space to allow me to do this. So, I thought I could just do it in my home. I thought my home was my home and I thought what i had done on the inside of mine and I found out since that Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 44 of 84 time that it's not. A lot of people, if you looked around this room, probably half of us have had a dream of wanting to open our own business, to run our open business, to be our own boss. There has been several people -- famous people that have started their business in their garages. Bill Gates. Dell Computers. Some bands, like Simple Plan. Just to mention a few. I wasn't aware that I had made so much trouble in the neighborhood. I barely received today this packet. I was shocked when I heard all the bad things, comments and stuff that -- you know, here I was trying to do this legal, I have been doing its ince Maya nd here n ow a II of a sudden I find 0 ut that a II these people are objecting to me because of traffic. One of the things that was in the packet that disturbed me was a whole bunch of pictures -- and I don't know -- Anna, do you have them up to show? Canning: No, we just had photocopied ones. I can use the photocopied ones. Bohrn: That are up -- that you can put up there? What was bothering me is that they put that there was the traffic impact. These pictures that were in this packet that was e- mailed to me are taken in the evening. I don't have anything going on yet. I don't have a business going, so I didn't have any of this traffic. The only one picture that's there is my camper in front after we came back from a camping trip to unload. So, I was bothered by that. My neighbors across the street that aren't here that don't have an objection to it, have a church thing that they have twice a week. They have a lot of traffic. The people living next door to us have 11 children, so when they come to visit -- they have and have had family gathers quite often, there is a lot of traffic. Those are all in the evenings most of the time. My preschool would be three days a week for three hours a day for five kids or under to start out. And as soon as I could build up enough name and recognition, then, I would go out into the community and rent a retail commercial zoned property to expand. So, I would like to know if on some of these things that you had in your packet, if I can rebuttal some of them or do I have to wait? Because I have never done this before. De Weerd: Yes, you can comment on those. Bohrn: Do I comment on them now or after people speak? De Weerd: If you would like to -- you have 15 minutes, so -- Bohrn: Okay. Right here -- let's see. This is our house right here. Next door neighbors. Yes, our camper is parked there, because, like I said, it was summer. Right there. He got a good shot, I guess. All these cars right here are either for the neighbor that's parked right here and the camper, or it's for the people right across the street over here that you can't see their house. Right here. There is -- I have people that are with me tonight that can tell you that during the day there is hardly any traffic and there is hardly any cars parked on this street. There is a business down the street that's a nail business. I don't know whether it's got a license or not, but I got a flyer saying that she was doing nails in her home. She's going to have probably more than five clients a day. You know, I don't -- I don't know. But my thing is most of mine -- I know three people Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 45 of 84 that were going to send their kids to my school and they are in walking distance. And so on this I don't think I have an impact and when I looked at these pictures that were in your packet, they don't have anything to do with my case. So, I would ask that they not be considered in. Is that -- I mean can I do that? I don't know. De Weerd: Yes, you can -- Bird: Sure. Bohrn: Okay. Thank you. Let's see. One thing that I did get permission from AMI, which I believe I gave you a copy in the packet and the first one says that they will grant a conditional waiver on -- to let me do my business, to conduct a business in my residence. This is dated July 17th and it says that the single car garage door may be modified for use as an emergency exit. However, in the event you move the preschool out of your home or close the school, the modifications to the garage will be removed and the garage door will be restored to the original condition. And me and my husband agreed to this. We had always planned on this. It wasn't a permanent thing. But what bothered me about this letter is it says vehicles may not regularly be parked on the city streets. That's fine. But what bothers me is that the letter that the Vineyards sent to you objecting to this, says -- and it's the one, two, three -- third paragraph down, the last sentence, it says: One of the conditions that the board temporarily approved this waiver is that no vehicles may be parked on the driveway or street. And I got nothing but run around. Every time -- I talked to this man, David Crandall, that is supposed to be the neighborhood manager, I talked to him back in April when I was thinking of doing this, because when I bought a house here I thought the CC&Rs -- and I was concerned, well, how can they across the street and do child care if there is not supposed to be any businesses. So, I called and he says, oh, if it's a preschool, daycare, you can do that. I thought, okay, you know, that's fine. I also told him about the garage, the door, and he said that it would have to go through this. So, we went through all the steps, we got, like I said, the letter on July 17th approving it and now all of a sudden it's like they are taking it back in this letter that they sent to you. So, I'm really bothered by that. If they didn't want me to do it, they should have told me in the first place and, then, I wouldn't have spent all this time and money and your time also. The next thing is, there was a lot of comments with excessive noise and, like I said before, I think a lot of people misconstrue that it is a daycare and it's not, it's a preschool. They would be there for three hours. They would be outside for 15, 20 minutes tops, weather permitting. Wintertime when it's raining, snowing, they are not going to be outside. Also, I do not teach in the summer. You know, it goes with the school year, just like everything else does. Let's see. I also had talked to a few parents, because I have been advertising trying to get -- if it does go, that they would be able to start and so with some of them I've talked to them about maybe parking on the side street -- which can we go to the map, Anna? Okay. So, the side street would be -- I'm sorry. I'm shaking. Cherry Lane. You would come in here and the side street would be right here. It's called Sonoma. And right here, these two houses right here, have no driveway on these -- on this street right here Sonoma, right where I'm pointing. This little intersection here, from here to here. So, they would be able to park there and walk around the corner two houses Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 46 of 84 down and drop off their kids, takes maybe three minutes tops, walk back, they have to sign them in, that's it. Let's see. Then the last one I wanted to comment on was the one that's from Planning and Zoning. I wanted to reiterate again that when I first filed for the accessory use that I had no complaints of my immediate neighbors that were adjacent to me or touched my boundaries. Also, on the next page in response to the preschool will create additional traffic and would be a hazard, I believe that, you know, it doesn't take very long, they could come in inteNals of -- if you requested that, I could have them come every, you know, 15 minutes. It says that they were concerned about the impact of the property value. Well, as you can see from the picture of my house, there is really no difference looking at it in this -- looking at the exit for handicapped children to come and go and I have a handicapped relative that I would have to build a ramp at my front door to be able to allow them to come in just to have dinner. So, I thought it would be, you know, kind of like both ways. My handicapped person could go in through my garage, you know, entrance door. Plus for a fire -- another fire escape and for if I get any special needs children that meet that requirement, which not very many people take, versus preschool, so that's another added bonus to my preschool. Also, with the property values, I would I ike to ask them -- or ask you if they can be saying this without doing market research and see what an appraiser or a real estate agent -- to say that this would actually affect it, the property value. Do you know if they can actually say -- you know, because it was also in some of the people's comments, the neighbor's comments about bringing down the value? De Weerd: Well, they can make those comments. Bohrn: Okay. Rountree: People say a lot of things. Bohrn: Okay. Thank you. Also, it says that there is two childcare facilities, so there is not a need for anymore. Well, did they do a market research, did they see if it was all tapped out, that all those preschools were full? I did before I started this and they were full. So, to my idea if they are full and have a waiting list, there is a need for another one. So, that's why I thought, bingo, here we go, I will try this area right here in my own backyard. Okay? So, I didn't really like that comment, especially from Planning and Zoning, which I didn't appreciate. I mean how can someone decide if you should have another preschool or not in that area? And, let's see, then there was -- on the next page -- I think the most part of my neighbors are objecting to is my business, which as it said on the first page -- or it says on this page right here on the top paragraph, the preschool could be reasonably accommodated in the living portion of the existing residence. So, if I wouldn't have done it in my garage, I would be open for business right now today. So, that was my concern is that I think they just had a problem with my -- the traffic that it's going to bring the business and I think that the issue here today is if I can have a garage that's not used as a garage and I think that's what we need to decide tonight and I'm asking you to decide that on that fact, not on the fact that I'm going to be watching five kids, three days a week, three hours a day. I have done that so it won't cause an impact. I could do it five days a week, but I chose not to, because, to me, that's helping Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 47 of 84 with the community, so there is not so much traffic and stuff during the day. My hours of operation are 9:00 to 3:30, but that's hours of operation when people can come and check out the preschool and that's when I'm there. So, I think a lot of people got misconstrued about that fact, because they were saying that, you know, if it was going to be all day long a daycare type situation, but it's not. One more thing I'd like to ask, if I can submit a couple pictures to you. And you can have this to keep. I had put in the packet on question 11 and -- 10 and 11 that there was a house on Under and I'm new to this, so I don't know if this house was built before '92 or not when the ordinance took effect to having a two car garage, but this one is a mortgage company and they clearly have made a garage into a mortgage company. So, I'll submit those. And, then, I just wanted to -- when I talked to Planning and Zoning, we had some problems, we had a meeting a Itogether a nd with the compliance 0 fficer, with Planning and Zoning, Anna, and Kristy, and the building inspector and they told me they would do whatever they could to help me and they would come out and take pictures and they would have them for a slide show. Well, when I went down to sign and turn in my paper that I had posted my notice and asked when they would be able to come out and take pictures, they said, oh, don't worry, we'll just come out and take some of the outside and I was bothered by that, because if you see on the inside, I have put my whole heart and soul into this and I know that was a little much, but I do a very decent program and I do quality and when I do something I do it a hundred percent and I do it the right way and that's why I was doing -- trying to do this legal. And I apologize for any error that I may have made tonight, because I have never done this before. Thank you. Canning: Madam Mayor, would you like me to put those overhead? Bohrn: Do you want me to explain them? De Weerd: Yeah. We will have you just make comments. Bohrn: Okay. They are not very good. Well, this is the door coming in from outside that we put in and the window is right here. This right here is the door going out to our backyard. So, the door and window that we put in the third bay would be right over here. This right here is the front of the garage door, two-car garage. As you can see, it doesn't look like a garage, it looks like a school and that's the atmosphere that I wanted to portray, because when children come to my school, they know they are at school and they are eager to learn and I think they learn better in an environment that's set up that way. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have questions? Bird: I don't. Rountree: No. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 48 of 84 Bohrn: Thank you. De Weerd: Okay. I have a number of people signed up and I will read off your name. If you would like top rovide testimony, f eel free to stand up and come forward. Kevin Snow signed up against. Were you sworn in? Snow: I was. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Just state your name and address. Snow: Kevin Snow, 1470 North Silverado Place. De Weerd: Thank you. Snow: Council Members, Madam Mayor, thank you for this opportunity to speak. I'm here on behalf of the homeowners association of the Vineyards and I am somewhat familiar with the situation of the Bohrn's preschool that has operated over this past summer. I apologize for Dave Crandall, he was out of town this week and so I'm here somewhat in his place. I can't testify for him. I can tell you what he's told me of the situation and my understanding of working with him and his attempts to work with the Bohrns over the past few months. Earlier this year the Bohrns made plans to operate a business out of their residential home. I believe they did contact Dave Crandall and notify him a nd the homeowners association of this. T here a re provisions made that people can run limited size daycares out of their homes and with that understanding Dave Crandall proceeded. However, he was not aware of the modifications to the home at that time, whether due to a miscommunication on his part I don't know. When we did find out, through advertisements and so forth, and some of the neighbors discussing it with us, that there were modifications to the home, Dave Crandall immediately attempted to contact the Bohrns to notify them of the provisions of the two-car garage requirement. He left messages, but was unable to make contact with the Bohrns until after the modifications had been completed. In the spirit of good will, a temporary waiver was offered for the summer. This was done providing that the Bohrns adhere to the law applicable to business in a residential area and that they would not be parking their vehicles in the street. Normal CC&Rs for our subdivision indicate that you do not park in the driveway overnight and I believe that was assumed. There was also the expectation that they would seek a more suitable location for their intended preschool as soon as could be done. That t he p Ian that they gave was f or approximately five children per class and to run multiple classes on different days throughout the school year and during part of the summer. The Bohrns did make an extra effort to insure that their modifications fit the look and style of the home, which we appreciated. The homeowners association is particularly aware of parking complaints on this street. Not necessarily traffic, but parking. The ordinance requiring two car garages has been most effective in keeping vehicles away from the street and to clear the field of view for local traffic. When I step out of my house on a given day, I can see 200 yards to the stop sign down the street, all the doors -- nobody parked on the side of the street, maybe one or two cars in driveways. It's wonderful. However, when we come to this particular Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 49 of 84 street -- can we back up to the overall plat of the Vineyards, please? As you can see, there is a slight bend in the road, right about where the Bohrn's house is. Driveways in the immediate vicinity are often filled to capacity in this location and multiple cars frequently line the street on both sides. Because it takes this bend, the street can have the appearance of being completely blocked off from the intersection as you approach towards the cul-de-sac. I have seen the pictures that have been presented. That's a pretty bad case. I have been there at 7:00 in the morning, at 11 :00 o'clock, I have been there in the early afternoon, I haven't seen it quite that bad, but I have consistently seen cars parked on both sides a nd very frequently see, through all hours 0 f t he day, full driveways. There have been times when cars may not pass each other on this stretch of road with confidence, meaning that it is so constricted and it's at that bend, that you're heading right at another car if it's coming to pass you in that particular stretch of road. We also fear the combination of full driveways and vehicles lining the streets added to the actions of picking up and dropping off small children is particularly dangerous. The field of view from doorway to curb is blocked by parked vehicles on occasion, as is the first seven feet of the street. This is clearly a hazard to the community and a disservice to the residents of the street. I do not know to what degree the Bohrns may contribute to this traffic problem. I do know that this is the current situation now without any in and out traffic due to additional things like people dropping off children. On my way to this meeting tonight I drove by the street and noted that four cars were parked in front of the Bohrn's home. I don't believe they all belong to the Bohrns, but just a point that it's not them that's the problem, necessarily, but it's a problem location. De Weerd: Sir, you need to summarize. Your time is up. Snow: I'll summarize. In view of the problems already evident, the homeowners association strongly recommends that the request for a variance, making the operation of the preschool potentially permanent and aggravating an already dangerous circumstance, be denied and that the ordinance requiring a functional two-car garage be strictly enforced. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Any questions, Council. Okay. Thank you. Alex Salinas signed up against. Okay. Russ Coyle. I'm sorry, after 9:00 o'clock I kind of go brain dead. Guy -- if you would like to comment, you can, please, come forward. Okay. Were you sworn in? Coyle: Yes, I was. De Weerd: Okay. Just state your name and address. Coyle: My name is Russ Coyle. I live at 1515 North Santa Rosa. So, I live just a couple houses down from this. And a couple things I want to point out. First off is we are not here to protest the integrity or the type of daycare that Donna may run. We are sure that she probably runs a fine daycare. But we propose that we should not allow these businesses into our neighborhood. We are very concerned about the safety of Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 50 of 84 children. We are concerned about the traffic flow and we are concerned about the value and the degradation of our property value. If I could digress slightly, I previously lived in a neighborhood -- you have heard the adage that no one wants to live next to a textile mill, as long as it's in someone else's neighborhood, that's fine. I have lived in neighborhoods before where daycares would come in and that may look fine, but the houses next to them has to lower their value of sale by ten, twenty thousand dollars and that oftentimes introduces a different g roup of individuals who, as they come in they don't take cafe of that house, the house next to them degrades, and pretty soon your neighborhood has lost essential value. I would like to ask the Council for clarification on whether or not it is required by all the developers to provide covenants for their -- for development for neighborhoods. Is that true? Rountree: That's correct. De Weerd: No, it's not a requirement. They are asked to -- I guess, Anna, we just recently looked into that. What is the language? Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, the application form for the preliminary plat states that if they are -- if they are having CC&Rs, we do ask for a copy of those, so that we can check maintenance agreements. We don't often see it -- mostly we see the CC&Rs because there are some common maintenance areas that need -- we need to see how they are being maintained, but that could be done through another mechanism. But it is not strictly a requirement. De Weerd: So, the portion we look at in the CC&Rs is just for your common areas and maintenance issues. We do not enforce CC&Rs. Those are neighbor to neighbor. Coyle: Okay. That was the question is if they were required by the city, whether or not those would be legally binding covenants. De Weerd: No. Coyle: So, could we bring up the photos that you showed - Nary: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Oh, I'm sorry. Nary: Just so you are clear, they are legally binding, but they are binding between the homeowners and the subdivision, not the city and homeowners. De Weerd: Right. Canning: Okay. Thank you. The first photos that you showed with the cars on the street. That came with the packet. Madam Mayor, if you would like me to do that, it's going to take me awhile. I put them away already. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 51 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. Coyle: So, let me say -- De Weerd: We do remember seeing them and when she shows them up here, it's -- Coyle: So, I would like to just say to the Council that those are not misleading. I have taken account -- I leave about 8:00 o'clock in the morning, I return home at 4:30, 5:30 o'clock at night. During the weekdays this week and towards the tail end of last week, I have seen at the most eight cars there and never fewer than five cars. At other times I have seen as many as 18 cars there, but I will acknowledge that that is not the result of Donna and that household. But what we have here is a real situation with way too many cars on the street and it is very true that you cannot see around that corner and we are very concerned about little children slipping out and running into that street. We have teenagers on that road that drive extremely too fast and we acknowledge we have a problem and we are trying to correct that problem. We wish her -- we have no animosity towards her, we wish her well. If she wants to go out into a commercial district, open up a home, we welcome that opportunity. I see my time is about up. We had too much time to take too many notes, I believe. There are multiple bus stops. If you see right around that corner -- just around the corner there is a child bus stop there. There is one on the other entrance coming off of Cherry Lane. So, we have -- we have kids that are being picked up there and those kids come home. She mentioned her hours between 9:00 and 3:30. When do the kids come home from school? At 3:30. That's when my kids get home from school. So, the time that those mothers are coming in to pick up those kids, the same time that they are going to be coming in and we are concerned about this and we ask the Council that we try to turn the table on these retail businesses moving into neighborhoods, I moved into a cul-de-sac to avoid this very problem. I have been there for 12 years and I see this as a growing trend and I think it's going to be costly to the homeowners that have been there for some time. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Any questions, Council? Okay. Guy Kerr. Kerr: I did not swear in, because I didn't think I had any comments. De Weerd: Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Kerr: Yes, it is. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. Kerr: My name is Guy Kerr and I live at 1892 West Sunnyslope Drive. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 52 of 84 Kerr: And my comment is that I am semi retired, I do not work all the time, and I live only three doors away from the location, but I happen to live on the corner where the stop sign is for most of the people who head this way. So, I live in this lot right here and there is a stop sign right on this corner and most of the people who enter this subdivision go this direction, they don't stop at this stop sign. Then, there is a stop sign at my neighbors right here and most of the people who cross this road, they don't stop at this stop sign and a lot of people believe that maybe they are not in a hurry in the mornings or they are not in a hurry in the afternoons and we all know that most people are in a hurry. So, I spend enough time -- my driveway faces this -- where this T is right here, but my house faces this way. I have spent enough time in the driveway, even my yard, to know that these people don't stop at the stop signs; they don't pay attention to the speed limit. There is a dip on both sides of this street right here and people actually try to cut around here to avoid the stop signs and, then, they fly through here and bounce through those dips while these people are trying to cross those stop sign areas and the other thing I want you to know is I have a handicapped daughter and I have lived in the location there for a little over eleven years and I didn't modify my home to get her in and out of my house, I just built it so that it would work without ramps and without extra doors in my garage and I also want you to know that just trying to back out of my driveway with the traffic at 8:00, 7:45, 8:15 in this area right here is virtually impossible and so I would like you to consider some of the things that the people here have about the traffic, because it really is important to us. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Carol Gentry signed up against. Okay. Signed up against. And Ralph Gentry as well. Thank you. Rountree: I have no idea. Patterson. Does it start with an R? De Weerd: Yeah. Rountree: Maybe. De Weerd: A lot of loops. Okay. Patterson: I have been sworn in. My name is Roger Patterson; I live at 1502 North Santa Rosa Place and let me apologize before I start, in case I fall asleep. I'm usually in bed by now. Okay? So, last night I get home and my wife comes home and I'm talking to her and I said tomorrow night I'd like you to be home for dinner, because I have to go to a city council meeting. Usually we don't eat dinner together, because she has her own business, see? So, she says, okay, she says, well, why, and I says, well, I got to go to the city council meeting. She said what for and I said, well, I got to talk about the daycare down the street and the opposition of it and she says, well, you know what, she says, I think I'd rather have a daycare than have that guy out there smoking pot in his boxer shorts. I said, well, that's a good point. I can't argue with that. So, I said, well -- I said what about the traffic? I said how about the girls playing at the end of Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 53 of 84 the cul-de-sac, you know, we get a few cars come by there, you know, doesn't that bother you any? And she says, well, she says, no, she said, because we get a lot of traffic anyway. There is cars all over that street all the time. She said that's not a big factor. So, I said, well, let me see, I got to come up with something else. So, I said, well, hey, how about that rent you're paying for your business, I said why don't you just move your business to our garage and you can just start shipping your drugs out of our garage. Well, she said, I -- I don't think our garage is big enough. She said I need a little bit more space than that. So, I kept thinking, I said how the heck can I persuade her to come onto my team? So, I said -- I said, hey, look at these CC&Rs right here, I said it says right here in these CC&Rs that this is a residential area and you're not supposed to have a business in here. You can't operate a business in here. I said how about that? She goes wow. I said, you know, if we let that business in here, we are going to set a precedence, people are going to start opening businesses everywhere down this street. I said, then, this residential nightmare is going to be a commercial nightmare. So, you know, she said you're right. I think that's about the second argument I ever won my wife. So I thought, you know, I better come to the city council meeting and I better talk about it. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Molly Bedney for. I believe you were sworn in. Bedney: Yes. De Weerd: Please state your name and address. Bedney: Molly Bedney. 1795 West Sonoma Drive. Madam Mayor and City Council Members, I have known Donna for a little over a year and I have on many occasions -- there have been, first of all, cars parked on my street for long periods of time. Secondly, I'm a little unsure of what's been presented at this point. I came here tonight with the intent on supporting Donna, because she remodeled her garage, I felt that was the issue. I've heard nothing but traffic issues. Well, maybe a little bit of the other from Donna. So, I'm concerned that -- yes, I'm concerned about the traffic, because I live in the neighborhood, I see more traffic and high speeds -- I should say over 25 after the high school gets out than I do during the day. I do not work out of my -- out of the home, I work at home most of the time, and I do appreciate the concerns of the other people 0 n the cul-de-sac regard ing this, that t hey a re - - that t hey a re dealing with a traffic issue, but I believe that's a separate issue from what Donna is bringing to you tonight. So, I would just ask that -- that, you know, the point of her remodel could be focused to that and not necessarily the traffic. I understand that has to be considered in a business like this, but she's just starting and so I'm here to support that. To my knowledge and from what I have seen, I went over, I looked at her facility, I -- I, myself, have schooled before; you do have to do some modifications when you have children in your home as a starting point. So, I guess that's pretty much alii need to say. I would like to at least add -- which I -- I can't add this with a lot of knowledge, but there is an adult handicapped foster care home at the opposite end of our subdivision. I believe it's on Sonoma, but I really have little knowledge that I'm bringing tonight. So, I just ask that you be fair and consider Donna is starting out. Thank you very much. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 54 of 84 De Weerd: Thank you. Diane Kerr signed up against. D.Kerr: I wasn't sworn in. De Weerd: Okay. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? D.Kerr: Yes, I will. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. D.Kerr: My name is Diane Kerr and I live at 1892 West Sunnyslope Drive. And -- okay. Okay. I live right here. The daycare is right here. There is a high school that's right here. And I knew that when I moved into the subdivision. In-- Bird: The high school can't be right there. De Weerd: No. Down lower. D.Kerr: Okay. But it impacts this traffic coming down Linder is what my point is going to be. Okay. In the morning I cannot get out on Linder Road to leave. I have to go down this path -- it's not easy to hold down here. I have to go down this path out this way. She's talking about leaving traffic right there. In the morning there is a lot of traffic that comes out that other access to cut through to get to the high school in the morning, so there is high speed in the morning already from the high school trying to gain access to Linder Road to get to the high school. Yeah. Which would be down here, actually. There is also a bus stop right here and I have the same hours as a daycare, because I work at a school, and so I see in the morning when I leave that this is quite -- the only way I can get out is out through Cherry Lane, because it is so heavily traffic'd and speeding, because of that -- people trying to gain access to that area. My other point would be that the daycare right now -- she was talking about how she came in and she wanted to have a business in her home, but, really, wasn't aware that you couldn't do what you wanted to do in your house. Well, they changed the front of their house and it does not look like the rest of the houses. None of them look exactly alike; they are not all cookie cutter houses. But also her house looks like a business. She has signs of business on her vehicles, which are parked on the outside, because you can't park inside her garage. There is signs that she has put in the common areas, have been asked not to put them in the common areas, advertising an open house, metal signs -- she continues to do that. Then there is also flyers that are put on your house advertising her daycare. There is also another business that's right in -- and I also have a mailed flyer from this business, which is a nail salon, which is right in this cul-de-sac right here, within a few doors down, right in that area of this business. So, that is an additional traffic hazard. I don't know if, you know, people rushing around in the morning to get their kids to preschool or late for their nail salon is going to affect that already heavy traffic problem within the subdivision. She was also talking about how in MerIdian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 55 of 84 the summertime she had her RV parked in the front. That's also against -- I think not only our covenants, but city code and you're not supposed to put it in the front there, but that kind of stuff -- there is just way too much -- there is no -- the only place that other people are going to have to park is -- and there is not really any -- much room in that -- in that cul-de-sac as it is. I don't know where they are going to park. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Virginia Boren. Thank you. Please state your name and address. Boren: Virginia Boren. 321 East Cassidy Road. And I visit Donna very often and we have our children that are about the same age. We have three high school students that go to that high school and I understand where the previous lady was saying that there is a lot of traffic, because I drive my daughter and my niece to school, but that's at 7:00 o'clock in the morning. By, then, school -- Donna would start her preschool. Again, I would clarify, it's not a daycare, it is a preschool and she wouldn't start that until later in the afternoon. And the only thing I have to object right now would be that the homeowners association stated that they tried to contact her without any prevail when they were -- when we were doing the modification to the garage. The modification took close to two months and we weren't -- we meaning my husband was there -- we helped them, you know, put everything together and it wasn't private, it wasn't something that we were trying to hide or do secretly. Everybody was aware of it. If they -- I feel if they wanted to contact her in two months -- it was plenty of time and we were there a lot of the times and if it were told to her that this could not have been done, we certainly wouldn't have wasted the resources or the money putting all that hard work into doing what we did for her. We would have definitely turned and tried to find something else, but nobody spoke up until after the work was done. And that's alii have to say. De Weerd: Thank you. Boren: I just feel it's not -- you know, it's not right. If they felt it was -- it wasn't something that they wanted 0 r s ometh ing that should be being done, then, its hould have been said at that time, because she did, she was -- since April we were trying to take the right channels here and it just seemed like it was a go ahead and, then, after all the work was done when everybody started slamming everything, saying, hey, that's not right. So, I think she should be given a chance. Okay? Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Mr. Nary, this is -- this is regarding a variance for use of the garage; is that correct? So, it's not an issue of the accessory use permit. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, according to the city code, the accessory use permit -- there is only 15 days in which to object to the accessory use permit. That time period past and no one objected. So, the zoning administrator can issue it. The issue -- the problem here is the statute is discretionary -- or the ordinance is discretionary. Mrs. Canning's staff, as they reviewed that and, then, had looked at the site, because, again, when they went over to inspect it, it appeared that the property was going to be used -- the garage was going to be used for the -- for the preschool Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 56 of 84 facility. That's where the rub is with the ordinance. But, you're right; it is only a variance that's being requested to use the garage -- to not have a two-car garage. It is required under Merid ian city ordinance, a different ordinance, 11-10-6, requires that every house have a two car garage that is able to have two cars park in it. The city doesn't require you park in it and the city doesn't require that you can't park on the street, those are left to the homeowners associations to deal with. But we only require that. So, what we have here is a situation where Mrs. Canning's staff, in reviewing this accessory use permit for final, because no objections were submitted, were concerned that a different ordinance was being violated, that's why we are here for the variance. If the Council were to deny the variance, it doesn't mean that she can't operate this accessory use, it means that she can't operate it in the garage. De Weerd: Okay. I thought I had better get clarification on that. Okay. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I, actually, did issue a denial letter, Mr. Nary, regarding this application, because she could not meet the standard and that denial was not appealed. She went forward with the variance process instead. So, I'm unclear as to the standing of the AUP at this point also. Nary: The denial letter was issued, but the staff recommendation was to seek the variance; right? And the denial was based upon the fact that the garage was going to be used for the accessory use and that was the only reason it wasn't issued at the time; right? Canning: Correct. Nary: The staff report -- Canning: Correct. The staff didn't recommend a variance, but that was the only avenue left, other than appealing. Nary: Okay. Canning: And the appeal of the decision, as we discussed with Mrs. Bohrn, would have had to have been that staff erred in some part and she decided to go with the variance request instead. Nary: So, the time period has past, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, so if -- if Mrs. Canning's already issued the denial -- if that, then, there wouldn't be any accessory use but for this variance, she'd still have to go -- even with this variance she'd have to go back through the accessory use process again, because that's still been denied. All the Council would be granting if they -- if they granted this variance, was for her to have, essentially, an enclosed garage for a living space and that's all she would be able to do with it. She'd still have to go back through the accessory use process again to be able to operate this preschool facility in her home. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 57 of 84 De Weerd: And did the applicant understand the ramifications of not appealing your -- your letter and -- [ mean I don't understand why she would come forward with a variance if she understood that she would still have to go back to the conditional use -- or the accessory use permit. I don't think it sounds like it was very clear. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't think we anticipated that far in the future. I will agree to that. I did discuss the possibility of writing a letter that was contingent upon not using the garage. That was not an option at the time, so the denial letter was sent out. I didn't plan that far in advance, I'm sorry, Mayor. I missed that connection. So, it was not discussed and if we had thought about it, we would have certainly had her file both applications to keep that opportunity open. De Weerd: So, Mr. Attorney, what is the reason for this hearing? To discuss if she cannot park in her garage? I mean because she won't have an accessory use permit at this point, then. Nary: Madam Mayor, most people wouldn't come to the Council to ask if they can enclose their garage and make it into a living space. They would either get a building permit -- probably many would not, but you wouldn't be here, normally, except for this accessory permit and, I'm sorry, I misunderstood that they had issued a denial, because I agree with you, Madam Mayor, it certainly would have made more sense for Mrs. Bohrn to have appealed that decision, as well as sought a variance at the same time. Because right now all that Council can do is either affirm or deny this request for a variance. We do have a city code that is very specific on garages. We have a city code that is very specific on the findings that are necessary to grant a variance. And the staff recommendation is those findings can't be made, there isn't adequate evidence to show that. That's all the Council can do is approve or deny that variance. It has nothing to do with the accessory use. De Weerd: Well, I think this is very unfortunate that she is not -- it's not been clear that this could have been a chance to appeal the denial as well. And I don't know if there is anyway to remedy that. Rountree: Reapply. De Weerd: Well, but that doesn't seem right. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: How come we -- how come we were -- somewhere in the packet wasn't shown where they have had a letter that was sent denying it? That's part of this variance application I would think. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 58 of 84 Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Nary also, all the public notices have included to allow a childcare slash preschool for five or fewer children to be operated in the required garage area. So, certainly the notice, as you can see from all the people that it has addressed the issue of the daycare, so they have been informed of that. Nary: I guess, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I'm the new person on this side of the bench, but that may have provided notice to the public as to what we are talking about, but all you have before you is whether or not to grant a variance and you don't have anything else. A s I said, if you grant the variance, that doesn't mean she can operate this d aycare, because that permit was denied and she didn't a ppeal it. So, she'd still have to go back through the accessory use process to be able to actually operate this -- sorry, not daycare, but preschool facility. She still would need to have that, because that's already been denied. The process is completed and all you have is this variance before you. De Weerd: I guess my question is did she know that she could appeal, in addition to the variance? Nary: I don't have the letter -- I don't have a copy of the letter. Canning: Yes, the letter does state that there is an appeal period and it lists the exact date of the appeal. De Weerd: Okay. Well, we will ask you in a little bit. Okay. Nary: And the only other issue, Madam Mayor -- and, again, I don't know the answer to this, I'm not trying to put Mrs. Canning on the spot -- from the staff report it indicates that the discussion was somehow with Mrs. Bohrn that her avenue to get remedy here was to get a variance. Canning: We certainly thought that was the case at the time we recommended her to get the variance and at that time we had no knowledge of any neighborhood opposition. Nary: Right. And so because of that -- I mean I don't know whether or not part of the reason, as I think you have already stated, Madam Mayor, as to why an appeal wasn't sought was because the belief Mrs. Bohrn had from that conversation was what she needed to do was seek a variance. If that was granted she, then, would be okay to proceed with her business. And that may be part of the reason. I don't know. Canning: That's -- I'm sorry, Madam Mayor. That was it exactly. I guess we just didn't think it through exactly right and I apologize for that. But we did think that the variance was the remedy for the situation. De Weerd: Okay. Well, we still have a number of people signed up here and I'm sorry I muddied the water with my question. Meridian CIty Council October 5, 2004 Page 59 of 84 Rountree: No. I think that's important. De Weerd: We will continue the Public Hearing with Cheryl Ferneau. Okay. Thank you. Signed up for. If you will, please, state your name and address. Ferneau: Cheryl Ferneau. 440 South Malachite in Meridian. De Weerd: Thank you. Were you sworn in? Ferneau: Yes, I was. De Weerd: Thank you. Ferneau: I have known Donna for several years and my children were at her preschool and I know what kind of a person and what kind of a business she runs and how she handles everything, with the access of traffic, interaction with the parents being there around the community, making sure everybody is aware of what's going on and so that it's not a problem. In my belief, Donna does this very well. I feel that in her whole process of trying to get this going, she has been misled several times. She has gone about the proper channels and I feel it would be very unfortunate to make her pay for somebody else's mistakes. She has done whatever she has been told is the proper way to do it and the time and money she has put into it and the hopes and dreams that she's had to get this going will be shattered. The traffic problem -- in my subdivision there is also a preschool. There is also an elementary school that is -- you go down my road to get to it for a passageway for the children to walk to and, honestly, there is no traffic problem with the preschool dropping off and picking up. I have been on Donna's street several times and there is a great deal of cars parked on the road, which has been mentioned, but it's not from the her side, it's from another group meeting of some sort. I also wanted to reiterate that Donna has not had the preschool going during the summer. She was going to try, but with everything she was running into problems getting things approved and she was waiting for her license to actually come through, which was helped up by t he Planning a nd Zoning Committee. So, s he had not had anything running, so has not contributed to any traffic. I guess that's it. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Now, I just would remind everyone, this is about the garage, okay? Okay. Steve Svoboda. Svoboda: And I was sworn in. De Weerd: Okay. Just state your name and address. Svoboda: So, my name is Steve Svoboda and I live at 1480 North Santa Rosa. De Weerd: Thank you. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 60 of 84 Svoboda: So, using the little laser here, I live about right there. And I was hesitant to come down here for a couple of reasons. And now there is another reason in that I -- you know, I could have watched the debate and everything else, but -- so I could have come down here at 10:00 and still said my piece. But, anyway, one of the reasons that I was hesitant to come down was because I really don't want to be at odds with any of my neighbors, you know. I believe in being reasonable, being flexible and so forth. I also believe that there are covenants and restrictions that one has to abide by. So, it's really a two-way street about being neighborly, whichever side of a particular issue you happen to be on. And also the other reason is because we actually have a contract on our home, we were one of the original homeowners on Santa Rosa, we have been there over eleven years, and although we may be out on the street, because we haven't figured out exactly where we are moving to yet, but we -- we have finally sold the house. However, the -- we had a full price offer on our house fairly quickly after we put it on the market and the -- or, actually, we didn't get it in writing yet, but the realtors spoke and the contract was written up and the people decided that they wanted to pray about it over night and the next morning their realtor called our realtor and said that they decided to go with their second choice and withdrew the offer because of the cars and traffic on the street. So, even though Donna and the Bohrns and, then, the daycare and all that stuff -- and I'm not totally aware of how much traffic and cars that may have already added or will add in the future, there is no denying that street, in and of itself, has a huge amount of cars parked on it and traffic along -- and it's a cul-de-sac. And for people to come in that cul-de-sac, then, the natural way to do that, since Donna lives on the opposite side of the street, you know, as you're coming in the street she would live on the left side, would be to go all the way down to the end of the cul-de-sac, turn around, come back and, then, pull up in front of that house, because there doesn't appear that there would be any parking in the driveway, because there is no garage. Okay? So, the -- in my mind a couple of the big issues are, one, you know, do the covenants and the ordinances apparently -- apparently there is an ordinance where you need a two car garage t hat apparently is for u se for your cars, 0 kay, and, t hen, the covenants themselves. So, the ordinance and the covenants, do they have any -- any bearing on this or -- and does one have to abide by it. And when you sign a contract on a house, I believe, if I'm not mistaken, when you close, that you sign that you are aware of the covenants -- whether you read them or not, that's -- you know, that's up to you individually, but if you come in afterwards and either didn't read them or feel like, well, you know, I don't think my little thing is going to be that much of a deal and, then, try to proceed, it's sort of after the fact, you know. And so I do think these issues of traffic and safety, of property values, I think my case has some bearing on property values, at least on salability, if not value in and of itself, I think these all need to be taken into account and, again, like it has been said before, we -- I barely met Donna, she seems like a very nice person, you know, I have no reason to think she wouldn't do a great job, and I wish her the best, but I feel like it -- you know, you need to work on both sides to be in the neighborhood. And one last point if I could and that is that I wasn't aware -- now maybe an attempt was made, but I wasn't aware -- I was not aware of any -- anything of going around to the neighbors -- certainly didn't meet any neighbors on the street -- it sounded -- a couple of comments were made about-- Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 61 of 84 De Weerd: Your time is up. Svoboda: Okay. They should -- we should go to them or we should be aware of things ahead of time, but I think it would have been neighborly to come to us and ask us what we thought. So, thank you very much. De Weerd: Thank you. Dee Carter signed up against. Carter: Yeah. I have no further comments. De Weerd: Thank you. Mason Carter against. Okay. Darrell Shuenberg. Thank you. Cindy Dury is for. Okay. Dury: Thank you. I'm nursing a broken leg. I was not sworn in. De Weerd: Okay. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Dury: It sure is. De Weerd: Thank you. Dury: My name is Cindy Dury, I live at 1422 West Santa Rosa Place. De Weerd: Thank you. Dury: Since we are here for one purpose and that's to decide whether or not she can use the facility as a preschool in our garage -- Rountree: No. Dury: I think that's the point that we need to stick with. The neighbors had the opportunity to come and speak and no one said a thing. They watched her garage, they watched there be construction all summer long and didn't say a word about it and now when she's put the money, the time, and everything, then, everybody has decided now this is going to cause a traffic problem and everything else. There are three houses on au r street right now t hat teenagers live in their garage a nd their garage is not being used for cars. There are two houses on our street right now that have been remodeled strictly for that purpose. So, to blame this on traffic -- the house with the eleven children, quite extensive, and I don't -- I don't think that it's fair for people to be able to come and sling when they had the opportunity to do that -- the time and the money has been put in, stick with the issues, stick with the problem. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. And I have one last person signed up here is Chris Svoboda. Okay. Opposed. Is there any other testimony to be provided to tonight? You have Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 62 of 84 already testified, sir. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Crandall: Yes, it is. De Weerd: Thank you. Crandall: My name is David Crandall, 1864 East Lochmeadow Street in Meridian. Madam Mayor and Council, I'm kind of in the middle of all this, because I work for AMI, I'm the neighborhood manager; I'm hired by the association to manage the affairs of the association. Contrary to what some things that have been said, I did start getting the calls from the neighborhood, I did start getting calls from people who live on the street asking me to take action on this. I did write a letter to Donna when I first became aware through contacting the neighborhood that she wasn't allowed to confine the garage, I sent her a letter stating that she had to go through the architectural process. I did not hear a reply from her. Some weeks went by, I had given her time to respond, I, then, sent her a second letter, a little bit stronger wording, with a copy of the forms saying that she had to submit the form. At that time she did submit the form and the impression was that this was going to be a temporary thing until she could find a place out of the neighborhood. We, then, laid down some conditions in talking with the board that you have heard tonight, that if she did take the service out of the community, that she had to restore the garage back to its 0 riginal c ond ition. We put some conditions a bout the parking of the cars and the whole time there was an assumption that it was just the one car bay, that she wasn't going to take the other two out, that she would continue to park her cars in the garage and the home would still look like a home, at least on a temporary basis we would have the one door, which I understand from Donna was put in because of the fire ordinance, they had to have an emergency exit. The reason I think a lot of homeowners are here tonight -- and I'm certainly here tonight is because Donna, then, changed what we understood the original agreement to be, she now wants to take the whole garage out of service and she wants all three car bays out of service and that's why the association directed me, through the board of directors, to write to Donna to tell her we were objecting to it and a lot of the letters that you have in your packet were signed by men otifying her that t he association's position, that we were objecting to all three bays taken out of service, because the implication, then, is going to be that the cars are going to be regularly parked either on the street or the driveway and that was a safety issue, it's an unsightly issue, and over time, as you have heard tonight also, it does encroach on the neighborhood and values of properties and resale values of property. We do not oppose her as to her intent to operate the business, the quality of care that she can provide to the students or anything about that, that's not what we are protesting. We are saying that there are covenants, the covenants clearly state that you must have at least a two car garage, with the assumption that you're going to park your vehicles in that garage, and when she changed from what the letters were originally written, saying that she now wants to take all three cars out of -- three car bays out of service, that's why you're seeing so much objection tonight. And we would encourage her to do the business, but we also encourage her to develop it quickly to Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 63 of 84 move it to an off-site location and restore her home to a home and not a mixed purpose. Thank you. De Weerd: Thank you. Okay. Is there any further testimony? Okay. Donna. You have five minutes for rebuttal. Bohrn: To start things, he assumed that we would park in the garage. Our covenants don't say that we have to do that and I checked into other covenants and they specifically spell out if you are supposed to park in your garage or not, so I don't know where he thought that about -- and that letter that he sent strictly said there will be no parking to you guys, but I never heard that. I never heard that. It was only regularly parking on the street was in the first letter. Some of the things I'd like to point out is that I believe Kevin Snow's wife does daycare unofficially. De Weerd: If we can keep this to you using your garage. Bohrn: Okay. Okay. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I got off track, I guess. De Weerd: Well-- and I know that's easy to do. Bohrn: I'm just very bothered by this, because I have felt like I have got the run around. I tried to do this legal, I've tried to do everything, and it seems like everybody tells me a different story. The first letter says -- it's dated July 14th, this is the letter you asked me about from the city Planning and Zoning. I'm sorry. It says that I'm not able to do my preschool in my home, because I don't have the use of the garage. It does not state in here what my resources are, so when I got this letter I was devastated. I called and asked what I could do. Sonya told me I had to put in for a. conditional use to temporarily use of my garage and that would be another 350 dollars and I didn't have it. Then, I asked to talk to her supervisor and Anna told me that I should put in a variance and she told me that if I didn't want to put in the variance, because it was 310 dollars, that I could appeal and that that was in my letter and I told her that it was not in my letter. And if I could submit this, I would really like this back, because I didn't make a copy of this tonight. De Weerd: Our clerk can take a copy of it. Canning: Madam Mayor, we have a copy in the record. De Weerd: Okay. Canning: Both letters are in there. I sent another letter a week later. Bohrn: Do you guys all have copies -- the Council? Because this first letter does not say that I could appeal and that I had 15 days and so when I talked to Anna, she issued me another one on July 27th. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 64 of 84 Bird: Madam Mayor, I'd like a copy of that. De Weerd: Will, if we could get a copy. Bohrn: -- saying that I had 15 days to appeal, it would be 150 dollars, and I called her and she told me that we should get together and meet and so we did, like I told you, with all the group headings and stuff, the building inspector and the enforcement officer, because she was telling me other things that if I wanted to appeal it, then, I would have to the remove the carpet, remove the linoleum, stuff like that, that I didn't think, even if I had to put back and make it a working garage, I would probably just leave the carpet, because it would make it warmer, because my daughter has allergies and in our garage down in Nevada we had carpet, because sweeping causes dust, which goes into everything, even into your house and we just vacuumed, instead of sweeping. So, I didn't feel like should have to take out my carpet and the building inspector said, no, if she wants carpet in the garage she can have carpet in the garage. So, I feel like I was - - I have just been getting the run around from everybody. Just like Dave Crandall said, you know, he -- we worked on it with our garage door open, because it was summertime, it was hot, I was out there -- people could have came and asked me, you know, what we were doing and I apologize for not letting -- talking to the other people that were notified about this issue, because the first one it was just my adjacent neighbors that I had to talk to and I did do that, but, then, we went into you have to have a variance -- I guess I didn't even think in the back of my mind that I need to talk to everybody else, I just figured it probably won't bother them, I mean you drive by they are not going to see anything different, other than the door that's out there and the window. But on two cars garages that people that don't have a third car garage, because they bought the house with just a two, it doesn't look any much different than that. I wanted to reiterate that my hours of operation are only hours of operation; it doesn't mean the kids are there from 9:00 to 3:30. A lot of people said that, you know, it would be during school and stuff and it's not, it would not be during, it would start after all the school started. The last bus comes through our subdivision there about 8:30 in the morning. The soonest I would ever open class would be at 9:00. De Weerd: Thank you. Bohrn: I would just ask the committee to consider granting me this, even if it's on a temporary basis. And I do think that Anna put this up in front of everybody to see. This is the house on Linder, 370 Linder, for the question of ten and eleven. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Council, do you have any questions? Rountree: I have none. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council? De Weerd: Yes. Meridian CIty Council October 5. 2004 Page 65 of 84 Canning: Regarding the first letter, when I found out that Sonya had sent a letter without the appeal information, I did send a new letter and set the appeal date based on the new letter. I did want to make sure that she was aware of that information. We did go forward thinking that the variance was the solution to this problem. I do acknowledge that. We did have a meeting with Daunt Whitman, with Chris from White Peterson, whose last name escapes me at the moment, and with Mrs. Bohrn, her husband, Kristy Vigil and myself and Joe Venamin to discuss this issue, because there has been a huge amount of miscommunication all throughout the process. While the -- before the AUP had been approved Joe Venamin did visit the site, it's in his logs, and he did inform Mrs. Bohrn that -- that she was not allowed to convert the garage. Mrs. Bohrn has no recollection of that conversation. We talked with Daunt in his presence, because we wanted to make sure that we all understood the requirements for a building permit. There was no building permit obtained to do this work. It did require a building permit. So, there are some conditions of approval that should the Council choose to approve this application tonight, that a building permit does need to be obtained to convert property from -- or convert the area from a garage use to residential use. Because I just wanted to clarify some of the staff concerns regarding the application with regard to processing. It was a difficult application to process, as you can see. It's not had a smooth journey. De Weerd: Well, usually, as we come up with things that we haven't faced before, we try and find a logical route of process and sometime it just doesn't work out the way we think it will, so we apologize for that. Council, do you have any questions or additional information you need at this point? Rountree: I have none. Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: Hearing no further discussion, I would move that we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 13. Bird: Second. De Weerd: Okay. It's been moved and seconded to close Item 13, the Public Hearing. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Madam Mayor, if I might just kind of summarize what I'm thinking about this - - excuse me. He can hear me. Just a little bit. This hearing is not about the use of -- or the -- yeah, the use in this neighborhood of a preschool, it's not about traffic, it's not about the character of the applicant, it's not about any of those things, it's about whether or not there is sufficient evidence for the city to make a finding that it can vary a city ordinance to allow a home to not follow the required city ordinance, which is to have a garage that would accommodate two cars. We have heard a lot of testimony about a lot Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 66 of 84 of things tonight, but very little -- I'm not sure any that relates to that particular topic. I don't find that there is any evidence that supports a finding for the variance, but I do hope that Mrs. Bohrn continues on with her endeavor and re-Iooks at an accessory use permit, possibly with the modification of another portion of her home. Having said that, I would move that we deny the request for variance for Item No. 13, Variance 04-006. Bird: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to deny Item 13. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none, Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 14: Public Hearing: MI 04-010 Request to a modify the hours of operation approved previously under CUP 01-016 from 8 am to 10 pm Monday thru Saturday and 9 am to 9 pm Sunday to 6 am to 10 pm seven days a week for Cherry Crossing Subdivision by Robnett Construction, Inc. - northwest corner of West Cherry Lane and North Under Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 14 is a Public Hearing on MI 04-010. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Before you open the Public Hearing on Item No. 14, I need to recuse myself from this hearing. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. I'll open this Public Hearing with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a modification -- a request to modify the hours of operation for Cherry Crossing Subdivision. The property is located at the corner of Cherry and -- De Weerd: I'm sorry, Anna. I guess Councilman Wardle did recuse himself for a reason of personal benefit. If you're not going to state your reason, I'll make one up. Personal conflict? Okay. Bird: That's fine with me. De Weerd: Does the Council -- sorry, Anna, I didn't mean to-- Canning: That's okay. I was still trying to figure out the cross streets. I think it's Cherry and Under. The property has undergone this discussion a number of times, actually. It Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 67 of 84 was explained quite well in the staff report and I think I'm just going to kind of briefly go through it. There is -- as many uses have come on, we were familiar with the problem that as a new use comes in usually we have to shift the lines a little bit and in this particular case they have needed some adjustments in the hours of 0 peration. The applicant is clear that this request is to accommodate a fitness facility, small fitness facility that wants to location at the north end of the property. The hours of operation are being asked to be adjusted to open two hours earlier. The closing time would still be the same. So, in a nutshell, that's the -- that's the request of the applicant. De Weerd: Okay. Is that all? Canning: I'll answer any specific questions you might have. De Weerd: Well, I didn't know if you were done or not. Canning: I'm not sure either at this point in the evening. De Weerd: Would the applicant like to come forward? The representative. Have you been sworn in? Robnett: Yes, ma'am, I have. De Weerd: Thank you. Robnett: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I appreciate the opportunity to be here tonight. De Weerd: State your name and address. Robnett: My name is Mike Robnett. I reside at 6655 West Oakhampton. De Weerd: Thank you. Robnett: Just a quick clarification before I get started. In the application I believe there was a legal description -- it is not the entire parcel that we are looking to change, but this section of it right here, which is -- De Weerd: Do you want to put that on the overhead? Bird: It should be in the application. Robnett: This is the portion of the property here that we have under contract right now from Hawkins, so they might be a little upset if we change the hours on the rest of their property. The hours of operation that are on there right now, as Anna had stated, were basically established based on the user that was intended to go in there. Now that we are working with Total Woman Fitness, they need the hours of operation starting at 6:00 Meridian CIty Council October 5, 2004 Page 68 of 84 a.m. and go to 10:00 p.m. and I personally walked the neighborhood behind it and on two different occasions talked to all the neighbors back there and their big opposition on hours was going late into the evenings, be it bars or restau rants t hat a re open until 10:00, midnight, 2:00 o'clock. The users that we are looking at fit nicely into a 6:00 to 10:00 schedule. We have been working with a dentist on one of the centerpieces and he would, obviously, be an 8:00 or a 9:00 to 5:00 operation. And we have been talking with a daycare -- not in a house, but on the western most lot. And that would probably start 6:30, 7:00 o'clock in the morning as well. It's just tough to find a user anymore that's going to be able to fit an 8:00 o'clock opening. We run our construction office out in Eagle and, you know, our guys start showing up at 6:00 o'clock and so we are requesting to change the hours to 6:00 in the morning to 10:00 p.m. seven days a week on that part, which is -- that shows that it's three lots. It is still one lot right now. So, I'll be glad to answer any questions you guys might have. De Weerd: Council -- oh, no. Council, over there. Council, any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: None. De Weerd: Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to testify in this application? Okay. Council, do you need any further information? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we close Item 14, MI 04-010. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Item 14. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve MI 04-010, modifying the hours to 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., seven days a week for Cherry Crossing Subdivision by Robnett Construction, Incorporated, and incorporate all staff and applicant comments. Rountree: Second. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 69 of 84 De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 14. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, excused. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES. ONE EXCUSED. Item 15: Public Hearing: MI 04-009 Request to allow a one-time lot division to separate an un-platted parcel into two parcels in an I-L zone for Joe Pachner by Joe Pachner - 850 West Franklin Road: De Weerd: Thank you. Item 15 is Public Hearing MI 04-009. I'll open this Public Hearing with staff comments. And Mr. Wardle has joined us again. Wardle: Thank you, Madam Mayor. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, this is a request to allow a one time lot division, essentially, to be more specific, it's to allow a reduction in platting requirements as we discussed in the past and it's for a currently unplatted parcel in an 1- L zone, so that request by city code does need come before you. We are on Franklin Road and the nearest cross street is Meridian. Nearest major cross street on the north side of the road. The applicant has not done a survey yet, but their general intent is to just divide the property in half to make two squares there. As Ms. Allen was -- in her communications with the applicant, he -- the applicant had not offered to make this property subject to a future full subdivision and Ms. Allen did not know that that was an item of let's say potential interest for the City Council. I know that when the Van Auker split came up the other day that I got the impression from Council that you were more comfortable with the split, because you knew that that would be the subject of a preliminary plat application in the near future. So, it admittedly came at the last moment, staff has provided an optional condition for you, but we were not able to talk to the applicant before that went into the staff report. I believe just from the brief all of ten second conversation I was able to squeeze in between a couple of items, that they are generally opposed to that condition and I did want to apologize kind of in advance for not raising it. These, again, are kind of new and Ms. Allen did not know that that was an issue of concern for Council. So, if the Council wishes to make that a fifth condition, we have provided that wording for you and we did also include a cross-access agreement, because one of the properties will not have any frontage on Franklin Road. And with that I will end staff's comments. De Weerd: Okay. Questions for staff at this point? Bird: I have none, Mayor. De Weerd: Okay. Does the applicant have any comments? I'm sure he does. You waited this long to talk. Were you sworn in? Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 70 of 84 Pachner: I haven't been sworn in, no. De Weerd: Okay. Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Pachner: Yes, it is. De Weerd: Thank you. Please state your name and address. Pachner: Joe Pachner, 10371 Skycrest Drive. Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, as stated, we don't object to the conditions of approval. We do question this additional requirement for a subdivision application because the intended use is very compatible all the adjacent landowners -- or land uses in that area, but if that is a requirement we will go along with it. De Weerd: Okay. Council, do you have any questions? Need clarification? No? Thank you. Council, what would you like to do? Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing nobody wanting any more information or anything, I move we close the Public Hearing MI 04-009. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close Item 15. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Any discussion? If not, I'd entertain a motion. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve M I 04-009 and to incorporate staff and applicant comments. Wardle: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Item 15. Is that without the additional -- Bird: Yes. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 71 of 84 De Weerd: Okay. I just wanted that clarification. Rountree: Is that with or without condition five? Bird: I beg your pardon? De Weerd: With or without condition five? Bird: Without. De Weerd: Okay. Wardle: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Bird: Isn't that what -- isn't that what staff said, that they are -- Rountree: No. They suggested that we have condition five for the subdivision. Bird: Okay. No. Without. De Weerd: Without. Okay. Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. We are getting late. Item 16 -- Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, if I could, just a brief discussion. I know Kevin is just -- doesn't mind waiting at all. Do you want us, on these future applications, that it's necessary or should we just try and figure out where it may be appropriate and whether or not -- I just want some -- I want to make sure we get the guidance. De Weerd: I think they trust your judgment. Mr. Wardle? Wardle: Madam Mayor, I certainly was going to say that as well, but if you need something a little clearer, I would say that on an application such as this -- there are certainly applications which would need to -- I think that could utilize the re-subdivision and the extra step and the extra fee and all of those things associated with it, but we will leave that to your judgment to bring those forward. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 72 of 84 Item 16: Public Hearing: MI 04-008 Request to modify the condition of the approved Preliminary Plat regarding the 5-foot wide asphalt pathway within Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's easement for Castlebrook Subdivision No.3 by Liberty Development, Inc. - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: De Weerd: Okay. Clear as mud? Okay. Item 16 is a Public Hearing for MI 04-008. will open this Public Hearing for all those wishing to testify with staff comments. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, we -- you had an opportunity to discuss this issue, actually, a few weeks ago as related to Chesterfield, which is just south of here, and the issue was the applicant offered as a -- offered an off-site improvement a s part of his a pplication for C astlebrook Subdivision NO.2 preliminary plat and that offer was to -- I think I have a -- yeah -- was to construct an off-site pathway within the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District easement and at that time we assumed that it would just fall within other easements that we have or other arrangements that -- other arrangements that we have with the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. When Mr. Amar went to go plat the third final plat, this issue came up -- I'll show you that. No, I can't show you the third final plat. Sorry. It covers a portion -- this portion of the pathway. And the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District said, no, you can't build a private pathway in that easement, it has to be a City of Meridian pathway and -- he needs to take out the pathway. So, the question before Council tonight is would you like to take over ownership of that pathway when it connects. We will have one on the north side of the drain and on the south side of the drain. So, we will have two pathway systems. There is a bridge connecting to the park at this location. So, that's one option and that wouldn't require modification to the preliminary plat necessarily. The other option would be to just relieve him of the requirement to construct a pathway. De Weerd: Okay. Council, questions? Bird: I don't have any questions. Canning: I'm sorry, Madam Mayor. In Chesterfield I believe what -- I might have to go back and look up the exact wording and maybe Mr. Amar could help me, but I believe the decision was that the homeowners association would take care of maintenance of the property until such time as the City of Meridian was ready to assume those responsibilities. And that's similar to language we have throughout the city. The intent is always that the city will eventually take over maintenance of those pathways. Now I'm done. Sorry. De Weerd: Thank you. Council, now do you have any questions? Okay. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 73 of 84 Rountree: Not a question. Maybe a concern if we don't have any comments from parks and recreation folks who would have to take this on within their budget and their resources, I assume, at some point in time in the future. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I was a little dismayed that -- the no comment stamp that came back from Mr. Strong. De Weerd: Would the Council liaison like to comment? Wardle: Madam Mayor, I'm not going to comment on the specific actions of the department head in regards to this, as far as it wasn't discussed with myself or -- in the scope of his duties. We are going to hear from the applicant in just a minute; right? De Weerd: Uh-huh. Wardle: I'll hang onto my comments until then. De Weerd: Okay. Is the applicant here? Amar: In body. De Weerd: Were you sworn in? Amar: No. De Weerd: Is the testimony you provide tonight the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Amar: Yes. De Weerd: Thank you. Amar: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Council Members. For the record, Kevin Amar. I'll make this really brief. De Weerd: And your address. Amar: 114 East Idaho, Suite 230. De Weerd: Thank you. Amar: This is similar to the application in Chesterfield. In Chesterfield, as well as this one, this is something that was not required by the city, it's not a portion of a PUD -- in fact, Castlebrook is not a PUD, it's a straight subdivision. It is something that we had requested doing to improve that area that's always left open to weed -- weeds and Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 74 of 84 nuisances. At the time we went forward Nampa-Meridian had the policy of allowing a pathway, public or private, on their -- in this case their land. This is not an easement, they actually own the property. Since, then, their policy has changed and they require that it be a public pathway. So, our request and our hope is not that it be removed, I still want the pathway and I still want it landscaped, make it a public pathway and we will maintain it until the city tells us they don't want us to maintain it anymore. So, as far as I believe Councilmember Rountree's question of does the parks department have the money in the budget, in my opinion if the parks department never wants to take it over, they don't have to. That will be a determination by the parks department. Some day they may want to, but if they don't have it in the budget, we are setting it up and it's always been our intent to have the homeowners association maintain it anyway. So, whether it's public or private, the homeowners association was still going to maintain it. Rountree: So, I guess my question is Nampa-Meridian District's position is public in the sense that it's open to anybody or public in the sense that it's owned and operated or operated by a public entity? Amar: In a conversation that we had -- and I believe, Anna, were you in that meeting when we spoke with Bill Hinton? He didn't care who maintained it, he just wanted a public pathway. The pathway maintenance and -- I believe in Chesterfield we talked about that, it can be sent out to whatever private entity to maintain a pathway, but it's a public pathway. De Weerd: Okay. Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Madam Mayor, just to clarify, I believe the condition that Nampa-Meridian Irrigation puts on is something that they are -- this is a new policy for them. If the city is willing to take the ownership, certainly, the homeowners association could maintain it and I think it's something that maybe -- I'm not sure if we have to look into it legally or if this is -- the policy has begun because of some of the state statutes for open recreation and those kinds of things as far as liability is concerned and I think it's at least worth looking into for future developments to look at -- and especially this one, but if the city needs -- is going to get pathways -- and we had a pathway comment earlier, we need to do some creative things and this is one of t he -- one of t he things -- this developer wants a pathway, thinks it's an amenity, I agree, and if we can make it available we should and we should maybe look into doing this on future projects if the opportunity arises with the development community and the irrigation district. Amar: I could comment about the preliminary plat. I think all of mine should just be approved, I don't need to -- I'll leave that for your discretion. But I also don't always get what I want. Rountree: With staff conditions. Amar: I just want to throw it out there. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 75 of 84 De Weerd: Well, thank you for that-- Amar: I have sat here that long, I expect my voice to be heard. Not listened to, but heard. De Weerd: Your time is up. Anything else? Amar: Thank you. Watson: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Watson: I know it's late and I hate to prolong the agony. I just want to be clear. His plat has been hung up in my office for months because of this last lingering issue. What will need to happen, in realty, is that the city will have to approve and sign on the dotted line an addendum to the license agreement. That's what I'm reading anyway. Amar: Can I address that? De W eerd: You bet. Amar: Condition number three of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law state the pathway shall be constructed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy permit of any lots adjacent to the pathway, which, to me, indicates that the final plat will be recorded and we can be building houses. The pathway just has to be constructed prior to a certificate of occupancy. So, I don't think that would be hung up in your office. Watson: Madam Mayor, I don't have those conditions in front of me, but the construction I don't think is the issue. I think we required that you have a license agreement for the pathway prior to plat signature. But that license agreement couldn't be obtained between your company and Nampa-Meridian and so I think we are headed into a direction where you're willing to be the contact, so to speak, on the operation and maintenance, but the city is the licensee. So, it puts the city in a position of being the contact for the irrigation district and enforcing the maintenance with the homeowners association, unless I'm misunderstanding this. Amar: I don't see the license agreement; I'm just looking real quick, though. So, I could be -- I have been heard, just not listened to. De Weerd: Mr. Nary. Nary: I also -- Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I don't have the conditions in front of me, but it would appear to me that they are going to have to have some amendment to the condition to make sure that it's clear as to where the future Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 76 of 84 ownership and maintenance of this pathway is going to be and that's the condition we are amending tonight. Once that's done, then, I don't think there is a particular hold up. There should be some acknowledgment from Nampa-Meridian at that juncture that that meets their satisfaction to allow that pathway to be there. Amar: I was wrong, it does say that the license agreement shall be signed prior to the signature on the final plat. I guess I would -- Bird: That's the condition put on it. Amar: Correct. I guess I would ask for some consideration. We have been sitting in Brad's office for a long time. Or remove the condition of the pathway. I guess that -- I want the pathway there, I would be happy to move forward, but modify a condition so I can be 0 ut 0 f Brad's office and get onto the Priester's office -- on the P riester, Don Priester. I'm still more than willing to put in a pathway, I just want to move forward with the project. De Weerd: Okay. So, Mr. Nary, what do we need to do so this can all happen? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess what I -- what I guess it is is still up to Mr. Amar. I mean what I thought your testimony was that you're willing to construct it and the only condition that the City of Meridian has to agree to is that at some point in the future, if the city really wants to, they can take over ownership. With that acknowledgment of -- if the Council is willing to do that tonight, I guess I don't know how much more delay there would be with Nampa-Meridian. I would assume it wouldn't be much and, then, Mr. Watson could sign your plat. Amar: Or the license agreement with Nampa-Meridian, which could take two to three months, so -- Nary: And your only other option, then, is to -- to not agree to that condition and remove the condition to build the pathway there, which you're saying you want anyway. You were saying if you remove the condition, you will just build it anyway? And, then, the Council doesn't -- and, Mr. Watson, I -- Amar: Accept it as public. I guess -- I guess I'm a little confused on the semantics. If the city is saying that we have to -- they are not going to issue -- in the conditions they won't issue any certificate of occupancies for those lots adjacent to the pathway prior to the pathway being constructed, can we sign the final plat and move forward? That holds a number of lots for me to sell those lots, which gives me guarantee or effort to construct this pathway. It still moves the process forward, everybody gets what they want, but the process isn't delayed on my behalf for another couple of months while I'm waiting for semantics. I mean we are -- I guess that's what I'm asking. I'm not trying to be difficultly, I'm not trying to be anything, I'm sure Anna's tired of me calling and asking and I'm sure Brad is also. It's an issue we have been talking about for months. ( Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 77 of 84 Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I guess, Mr. Watson, I mean what -- what's your thoughts on what he's asking? He's simply saying if there is a condition that, instead, deals -- allows you to sign the plat now and there is some other conditions later that still assure the performance of having the pathway constructed, would that be satisfactory . Watson: Madam Mayor, yes, I guess it boils down to whether you want the pathway there. If the answer is yes, then, that condition tied to the final plat signature could be deleted and the construction of it could be tied to another milestone, such as COs on those lots backing up to it. Amar: Which it is tied to that already. Watson: Right. De Weerd: Okay. Nary: So, you can do that? Watson: Yes. De Weerd: Any further clarification, Council, on what's being requested? Rountree: Probably for specificity, if Brad has the condition number and the modification, I assume, would be to -- if we want to do this, to allow the signature of the final plat, without agreement with Nampa-Meridian, all other conditions to be complied with. Watson: Madam Mayor and Councilmember Rountree, it's in 1.13 of the order of conditional approval. Submit a signed license agreement with Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District for the pathway and culvert foot-bridge prior to signature on the final plat. That's the way it reads right now. You could probably delete that whole sentence. Rountree: Okay. And still accomplish the path. Watson: There will need to be a license agreement at some point in the future. Rountree: Actually, you could leave the first part of that sentence and just strike the signature of the final plat. Watson: Sure. Rountree: Okay. De Weerd: Okay. Okay. Well-- Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 78 of 84 Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we close the Public Hearing on Item No. 16. Bird: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to close the Public Hearing. All those in favor say aye. All ayes. Motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes, Mr. Rountree. Rountree: I move that we modify the condition of final plat approval for Castlebrook Subdivision No.1, Item M I 04-008, condition 1.13, to remove the reference to approval of final plat conditioned upon the agreement with Nampa-Meridian. Bird: Second. Rountree: Just remove that last portion on the final plat. Bird: Second. Rountree: And that the city recognizes and works with the applicant and Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, so they understand that it will be a public pathway. Bird: Second agrees. De Weerd: Okay. Is there any further discussion? The motion is to approve Item 16. Hearing no further discussion, Mr. Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 17: Water1 Sewer1 & Trash Delinquencies: De Weerd: Okay. Item 17. This is to inform you in writing, if you so choose, that you have the right to a pre-termination hearing at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, October 5th, 2004, before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person to be judged on the facts and to defend the claim made by this city that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel. Your service will be discontinued on October 6, 2004, unless ( Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 79 of 84 payment is received in full. Is there anyone present who wishes to contest his or her water, sewer and trash delinquency? They are hereby informed that they may appeal and have the decision of the city reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho State Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off. The amount of the turn-off list is $30,489.86. Bird: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we approve the turn-off list on October 6, 2004, In the amount of $30,489.86. Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve the delinquency turn off list. All those -- oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Clerk. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Item 18: Ordinance No. 04-1104 : AZ 04-015 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1 +/- acre from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Secret Garden Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - 2490 North Locust Grove: Item 19: Ordinance No. Revision: 04-1105 : Sewer Use and Service Regulations Item 20: Ordinance No. Revision: 04-11 06 Water Use and Service Regulations De Weerd: Okay. Items 18, 19, and 20 are ordinances numbered 04-1104, 04-1105, and 04-1106. Mr. Clerk, will you, please, read these ordinances by title only. Berg: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. Ordinance No. 04-1104, an Ordinance finding that the owners Oliver Cleaver and Debbie A. Cleaver of certain real property generally located at the half mile between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road on the east side of Locust Grove Road, Meridian, Idaho, have made a written request for rezone of the zoning classification for real property that lies within the boundaries of the City of Meridian from R-8, Medium Density Residential, to L-O, Limited Office District, as defined under the Meridian City Code Section 11-7-2G, replacing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof, in conflict herewith, and directing the city engineer to add said rezoning designation to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho. Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 80 of 84 Berg: Ordinance No. 04-1105, an ordinance repealing the existing sewer use and service regulations, codified at Chapter 4 of Title 9 of Meridian City Code, reenacting a new Chapter 4 of Title 9, of the Meridian City Code, to be known as the Sewer Use and Sewer Regulations, including purpose, definitions, applications of chapter, authority and establishment of superintendent of wastewater, establishing rules and regulations, authority of city personnel, mandatory use of sewers, regulations of use of public sewers, prohibition of discharge of objectionable waste without permission, building sewers and connections, industrial users, inspections, and approval of connections, rejection of materials or workmanship, sewer line extensions, backfilling sewer and water plan adoption, assessments and fees, cooperative and reimbursement agreements, board of appraisers, sewer charge appraisal, Council approval of charges and fees, basis for charges, wastewater users fees and assessments, sewer connection requirements, special charges, sewer inspections, septic tank waste dumping, billing and payment, delinquencies and procedures, disconnection for nonpayment, sewer system fund, receipt and disbursement of monies, private sewer disposal systems, maintenance of lines, contractor license, point of liability for maintenance, user liability of violations, limitations of city liability for service interruptions, prohibition against injury to sewer systems, penalties, providing for conflict, validity, savings clause, and providing an effective date. Berg: And Ordinance 04-1106, an Ordinance repealing existing water use and service regulations codified at Chapter 1 of Title 9 of the Meridian City Code, reenacting a new Chapter 1 of Title 9 of Meridian City Code, to be known as sewer use and sewer services regulations, including purpose, definitions, authority, mandatory use, application for service, point of liability for maintenance, water service line connections and water lines, workmanship, backfilling and service repair, right of entry for inspections for testing, water main extensions, assessments and fees, cooperative or reimbursement agreements, basis for water charges, users, and equipment connection appraisers -- appraisals, connection to property outside the city limits, board of appraisers, monthly rates, due date for payment, and late charges, delinquencies, resumption of water service after turn off for a nonpayment, authority to amend regulations, water fund establishment, private water systems, water line development, adoption of water plans, pressurized irrigation systems, non-liability for water shortages, lawn sprinkler and use regulations, limitation on location of the post, fire hydrants, protections, and pipes and meters, waste of water or entry to water system, users liability, penalties, providing for conflict, validity, savings clause and providing for an effective date. De Weerd: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I guess while we have this in front of us, I'd ask Mr. Nary, is there any chance that we could just show these ordinances by title only up on the screen and that would meet the criteria or does it have to be read into the record? Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council -- I thought you wouldn't call on me, that's why I came over here. What the state statute says is they have to be read once by title. At least the only other place I have ever had experience they don't read them Meridian City Council October 5. 2004 Page 81 of 84 by title. They list them on the agenda by title, they acknowledge them on the Consent Agenda by title, and if they waive the reading rules, they put it in the actual title of the ordinance that they are waiving the reading rules and they pass it on the Consent Agenda. De Weerd: Can you perhaps work with the city clerk on a process here, so that -- you know, while we love to hear from the city clerk -- Nary: Madam Mayor, what I was going to propose -- I know -- I know it's disappointing that we didn't solve all the problems in the first day, because I know you had a lot of expectations for the 5th of October and, I'm sorry, as I told people, I remembered where I worked and I remember what I did, and that was probably all I could do for the first day, but what my expectation was is we have an issue about the ordinance regarding appointing of officers that we need to clarify next week and fix. There is a couple of other issues, administrative types of issues -- one of them is the swearing in of all of the audience. I think we have had that issue come up previously and the Council has requested that we change that and delete that provision from the code. Our normal process is to have that on pre-Council for discussion. What I was planning to do is I'm hoping to be able to have by next week at least a couple of t hose things, the more administrative function types of things, so that we can get the process moving a little bit faster on pre-Council, so I'm hoping to have as many of them as I can get done by the end of this week on your agenda next Tuesday. If you think they are satisfactory and you're willing to move forward, you can always move them onto your regular agenda and pass them if you want to do that. So, some of those things we can do. Like I said, the state code doesn't -- there is no case I'm aware of in the state of Idaho that was challenged because they didn't actually read the ordinance out loud. De Weerd: And we could also read it to ourselves. Nary: Right. The statute says it has to be read once by title. It doesn't say it has to be read out loud. De Weerd: Thank you. Well, we will look forward to you bringing those clarifications back to us. Rountree: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Yes. Rountree: I think we have an executive session to adjourn to, but before we do -- Bird: We've got to pass these. Rountree: What's that? Bird: We've got to pass these three ordinances. Meridian CIty Council October 5, 2004 Page 82 of 84 Rountree: We've got to pass the three ordinances, number one, so I will move that we approve ordinances 04-1104, 04-1105,04-1106, with suspension of rules. Bird: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to approve Items 18, 19, and 20, ordinances that were read by title. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Berg. Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. Rountree: Madam Mayor, one point before we break for executive session and I got a sense that we were a contributor to the issues as it related to Mrs. Bohrn's garage and -- De Weerd: And this is for Anna. Rountree: And this is for Anna. And also for Bill. I'm suggesting for consideration do we offer to Mrs. Bohrn the opportunity to appeal the denial if she can arrange her dwelling in such a way that she can meet all the other ordinance requirements of the city and that if she can do that and chooses to appeal, that we waive the cost of the appeal and I would just ask for comments and considerations on that. Canning: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, Mr. Nary also, there -- when I sent her the second letter, I did make the appeal date subject to that second letter and it's always seemed to me to be a little bit of a useful loop hole in that someone can ask a director's determination and, then, the appeal date is set from that date, so I'm not sure that she couldn't -- I guess this would be the question for Mr. Nary. Can she ask for a reconsideration of that letter that if she were able to do that all in her house could she be approved and, then, I could write the letter based on that request? It would just be a determination letter. And it always seemed a little bit of a loophole. I did offer, by the way, to write that letter for her, but she was not interested, she wanted to have it in the garage. It was not an option to just have it in the house, so -- Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I was -- in fact, part of the reason I did come sit over here was to talk to Mrs. Canning about some opportunity we might have to talk to Mrs. Bohrn a bout what does she do now, because, obviously, she's got a concern that she's been damaged by her neighbors, she may believe that the city has somehow caused that damage as well, and so we need to figure out what exactly we can do. Our ordinance says in-home occupations that you can't use your garage at all for a home occupation. There isn't anywhere -- there isn't an exception for that, except by a variance. But that's no longer a garage, it's now living space, and so it's certainly Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 83 of 84 eligible to be used for that. Just because it seems to violate a provision about not having a garage on your property, doesn't mean it isn't eligible for an accessory use. So, I think we -- Mrs. Canning and I need to probably sit down and figure out what do we do, so we can maybe at least approach Mrs. Bohrn and say here is what we can come up with, here is what we think you can do, I just need to figure that out in my mind tonight as to how do we do that. Rountree: That's all I'm asking. Nary: Sure. Rountree: Some way to continue a dialogue with her. Wardle: Madam Mayor? De Weerd: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: I would agree and also another comment that Councilman Rountree made is if there is an opportunity to waive some of those fees, because of some of the confusion, whatever process we have that might seem reasonable, I think that would be in order as well. Nary: Madam Mayor, Members of the Council, I think before we would probably suggest waiving a fee, that would certainly come back to you before -- before we would recommend doing that. The only other thing I'd add to your question, Council member Rountree, is because the process is completed, I think it would be -- I think it would make more sense to waive a new application fee, rather than go backwards and do a reconsideration of something that was decided two months ago. Rountree: Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. De Weerd: Well, yes, if you just discuss that and maybe report back via memo to Council on what the steps would be. Bird: Tomorrow would be fine. De Weerd: Later tonight. Bird: Madam Mayor, I move we go into executive session as per Idaho State Code 67- 2345( 1 )(b). Rountree: Second. De Weerd: It's been moved and seconded to adjourn into executive session. Mr. Berg, would you call roll. {~ ( Meridian City Council October 5, 2004 Page 84 of 84 Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Wardle, yea. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. De Weerd: Thank you. EXECUTIVE SESSION: MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 :55 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) 10 I 2-6 I {) 4- ATTEST: w1~~&&ER~ . ~~ ,~ 0 .f ~..,o Uer 1S1 . ~'.? -:'..;." ':.tJ~ ..n.~ .....;;-.... .... '\v ~ 'i, . .......".. 'lib, .",,\ <'llbun nUl' October 1 . 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Dyver Development LLC AZ 04-018 October 5, 2004 ITEM NO. 5-A REQUEST Findings - Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R-4 zones for Chatsworth Subdivision - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: ~)Y1 ~\rXf~ Emailed: ~,!J Date: I 0- 5 Staff Initials: Phone: m/l4' Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.40 Acres to R-8 and a Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of Seventy-Seven Building Lots and Four Other Lots on 19.40 Acres in a Proposed R-8 Zone for Chatsworth Subdivision, by Dyver Development, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-04-018, PP-04-025 RECEIVED OCT D 7 2004 C~ty Of Meridian CIty Clerk Office For the City Council Hearing Date of: September 21, 2004 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code ~67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the September 21,2004 public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Written and oral testimony was received on this matter, as reflected in the records ofthe City Clerk (for written testimony) and in the official meeting minutes (for oral testimony). c. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code ~67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code ~~ 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISlON & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-04.018, PP.04-025 . PAGE 1 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is Dyver Development, LLC. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits E and F for the findings required for each type of application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. S67- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6,2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated 06-09-04 as shown in Exhibit B and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibits C and D. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-Q4-QJ 8, PP-Q4-Q25 - PAGE 2 Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code ~ 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted) it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat is hereby conditionally approved; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits I. Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat) the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval of the final plat. After approval of final plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction of the public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003) the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing) and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body ofthe City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code ~ 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52) Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Deed and Legal Description (3) Exhibit B: Approved Site/Landscape Plan (3) Exhibit C: Annexation and Zoning Conditions of Approval Exhibit D: Preliminary Plat Conditions of Approval Exhibit E: Annexation and Zoning Findings Exhibit F: Preliminary Plat Findings CITY OF MERlDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-04-0 18, PP-04-025 - PAGE 3 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 5th oe.+o ber , 2004. day of COUNCILMAN SHAUN WARDLE VOTED tjvv C'OTTNClLM.'\N BILL NARY V{)TRD COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED ~ VOTED~ COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMYdeWEERD (TIE BREAKER) - VOTED ", ::: -;: ()::: , J\.QI- 0 .::: " U. .~ ~ ~ "".0 :Sr 1 si ' ~ $" ~ ~ ~'?' " ~~ -'eou ~ ...... " 1...// NT"< ' "", Copy served upon Applicant, The Planni~gtlliUfigcing Department, Public Works Department Attest: and City Attorney. BY:~ ~mLl Ity Clerk Dated: 10 - 12 - 04 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-04-0l8, PP-04-025 - PAGE 4 EXHIBIT A See Attached Deed and Legal Description (3 pages) ~_. JUN. 14.2004 lO:55AM'-" 0( t.f'1..'?f9S'" ~ - .~. ~- ~~{6'G -;. . - ,t;.-J r L ~ - r A~' N '4 r;-~ ~..J....:.-r .1- - - . ~ -...J Q) p, 4 . " ,A PiOl1W' CllllIPUIY PIONEER TITLE COMPANY OF AJ),A COlJNTY 81S1 W. Ritle;man Ave.! Boise, IdahQ 837M (208) 377-2700 r APA aaUHTY REmlRDER J. DAVID NAVARRO BOISE lDAIIO OOlO3f!l. O.:Og PM DEJiUTY Joanne Hooper RECORDED-RCQUEST PF Pioneer ~MO!!tff_.. 6.0a WARRANTY DEED 2 If! IlflllIlllllfllllWlllllllm If Ilr IB41116~373 ForValu.e Received Jerry L. Cavell &: MlIriel1. Caven, husband llnd wife hereina1ter :retemd to as Granw, does hereby grant, bargain, $e11, wammt and convey unto Dyver Development LtC here:inafter~r.red. to as ~e, whose = addms ls3~:C. r.llllklin l1:lL S~. ':'0, }~ ID 83642 the fullowing des~d prCJIl.i3~, ttrwit: ~?? e. . t)(/(1'IU ~ m0UlI14-tt SEE EXHIBIT A ATIACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. To HA VB AND TO HOLD the said ptemises, with their appurt=nlCes llllto the said Grantee, his heirs and assigns fotcver. And the said Gm:ot~ does hereby covenmt to and with the said Grantee, that Grantor is the ~ in fee simple of said premises; that said premises are n- from all enClllllbrances e;!.cept current y= taXI!!, levies, and assessments, and except U.S. Patent reservations, restrict:iOllJi, easem.eDt$ of ~orl:l, and easements visible upon the premises, and t!urt Grantor w1Il wammt and cterend the SillIle frQ.Cll; all claims whatsoever. Dated: June 2, 2004 7l/1flr_;fJ... a. ~~-r ) Muriel J. CavenV' ST^TE OF IDAHO. County of ADA., ss. On this 2" day of June, In the year of2004, before IQ~ tile undersigned, notary public peuonally appeared Jerry L. Caven llIld Muriel J. Caven known or identified to me to be the penOD.S whose names are subscribed to the within instrur;nent, and acknowledged to mo that thlo/ t::<ecuted the same, "",,,,,,,\1'. ........-.,-"'1 ........ O~ M Jp~~~~~ .... ...~ ..-.... 1'... "" :'lIP ."'I....';r, -." ~ ~ ~ ~ . ... <.1',., "-=. .. .. OT~ ........ :: .. ~ '"1.~ >_ .. -;t. -;. :::*= -r\ ': : : ........... : * S . \ h. .... ;, .. <""l1,eL1.C l : ':.~'.. .4 ~ 0:....".. .,,~ .." ~ T r. ......... ~ y ...lfi. #,,#,~;l? OF rp~........... :I".'"lIli""'" Notary Public ofIdaho tksiding at Conunission expires; ~~05-11J.06 Rtil(ing in Boi5e. IdahO /.. ""'\ ~.... JUN, 14,2004 IQ;56fU \../ ~+Jtr~ ~ ~-=~rrA~ . ,934 ~ ~~ ~; -:. Apan;cl of land lying in. me SOUth ha1f of the Nonheast quarter ofScction 30, Townsb.ip 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Ii:bho, more partlcularly descrlbed as follows; COlllnrellcilli at the Southeast comer of the Northeast lluarter (tbh East qtIl[l'tef comer) of Section 30, Township:3 North, Range 1 East, BoiJle McridiPIl; Thence North 00 degzus 13'58" East 38U3 feet alongtbe East line of the Northeast quarter of said Section 30 to a point; Thence SoUth 89 degrees 43'S2" Wcsr33.00 feet parallel with the SouthliM of the Northeast quarr.erto a point on the Westerlyrlght-of-.way line. of Locust Grove Road, said point being the RE.u. POINT OF BEGINNING of this desroption; Thence So'IJth. 89 degrees 43 '22" W m 'S71.11 filet to a point; Thence Soulh 00 ~e.9 13'59" West 381.3S feetto a point on the South llne oftht Northeast quarter, Thellce alOllg the South line to the Northeast quarter; Thence South 89 degrees4S'52" West 1035.20 !'eetto apointoD. The W~tline aftheEethalfof the Southeast quarter oftb.e South\Ve$t qulII'ler of the NortheA$t quarter; Thence North 00 degrees 00'07'" East 66 LIS feet to the Nonhwest comer ofllie Eest half ofti;!e SoUtheast q\lmar ofllie Sou~st quarter Qfthe Northeast quarter; Thence Nortb 89 degrees 43'22" East 1608.98 feet along the North liD.e afthe sotrthhalf aitbe Sonlh half of the NorthellSt quarterto a point QlJ. the Wemerly right-of-way line ofLoollSt Grove Road; Thence Soum 00 degrees 13'59" Wesl: 280.00 feet parallel wiIh the East' line of the Northeast quarter alOtlgthc W~erlyrlght-of..way line ofLooum: (iro1Ie Road the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING. p, 5 IDAHO SURVEY GROUP E"i- m=e,:C\ A (}) 1450 East Watertower St. Suite 150 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone (208) 846~8570 Fax (208) 884-5399 Project No. 04-120 RUT to R-8 Proposed Chatsworth Subdivision June 14; 2004 A parcel ofland located in the South Y2 of the South 12 of the NE ~ of Section 30; T. 3N.; R. IE., B.M., Ada County; Idaho; more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the comer common to Sections 19; 20; 29; and the said Section 30; from which the ~ comer common to said Sections 29 and 30 bears South 00014;19" West, 2645.60 feet; thence South 00014'19" West, 1984.20 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING.. Thence continuing South 00014; 19" West, 279.95 feet; Thence South 89042'09" West, 603.89 feet; Thence South 00015'58" West, 381.14 feet to a point on the East-West mid-section line; Thence along said line South 89043'55" West, 1035.14 feet; Thence North 00000'34" East, 661.03 feet to a point on the North line of the South 12 of the South 12 of the NE ~; Thence along said line North 89043'10" East, 1641.82 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 19.62 acres, more or less. Prepared By: Idaho Survey Group, P.e. ':.fV'~~b]L ~ "/ JUN 2 8 2004 MERlO1.AH ;PUBLIC WOR-oKS DEPT. Professional Land Surveyors EXHffiIT B See Attached Site/Landscape Plan (3 Pages) '---"IT . ---11=:1'1 II-- i ,y;/ 'O.:f' ,""'\ _ ~~~~j::T \. D \,_t:, - :/ '\.---'" '\ / r;.~_,~~_ -~2~j ,,,L.L .L , -- ~ " --~ r -1JP:1: -"~IffI'lP: ' fe"n~( :f~ "~~ ' If y-i _iJ'Y--i l~%: M';~ : C 1 . J~~ ~:~, e J ve 11 : 11@:1@ 11 ~ i Iff ~ :--::~ }. ,','v~:;., -.;:~.~ ~--~-~ ~-----~ ~-;T-~ .--F-J. ,I',' r~' !. e /v ' , ! e! L-_-1f1 I' . 'x ~~-::T,j-~ --:t:- -" - - I -- ,-:\~ ~I,ijr' ;;'Vi"'-' f--e:--1rf' -". I [i-~-i rfe-f i i If'; i t '~I ~I II ,q~'V~"~'-='-t.f '~r'~'ili'l'i'l' , ~ ..._......._...J I. I l. ~ . I . ~ I LI r1 ~ i. L.._ _ _J ~ -~- 1 ~ V"" l : I I aaar: l4 r ~J I I i 1-- -1 t, . e i' ~'r-==:~: =:=! :==:: :==i:"t~ :===-~ ~ ! e! ~ - .J.. I;l. : : ): i : : I I I : '/" --! i f7----1 11 I i I i l' I i I f I j I: f-- - 1 j' ~!@:~. le::J..::e::I... I @: :j:S! t I )' t;~~ I.::~ :~~ --::: :. ~~ - :. ~J'~ ., ~:,-,~;. '1 ! f !1! !: ,[ !:\" i i. il-, ~~#'~ '\ ~ '1 i i - J ~:; ~ : I /: I " Il'L~_~' :.-~~,,- .' I ~=-=~~~~---" ~I =l=~ i ==-~ :r ~:; -:~ HJ " '1 1" I ' " 'I i ~-;:,., 1 ill ~ i i : I I; , e il , f - -- :-1 ~ ~ . "'1~ ri L__':._-, L!_~~-j I[ L~_! _ J 3~ ',' .- -, "-6":'" r.;- ~ , 1 to @ 1~ I I... I ('-- !"r I r! 'I! 'II~':;! it f1!@! , -- 1 ~I L_J _ e I: 1/ M2'.d f"i ~ - ~ 0~.~r- i ,,~-, I '@i' -- ___1 '~ r @! ~/ i: t! ! e [. ,jJ[ l ~-l /'-.. ~+ ~ ' ": ! I ~:--::~ i Ilr~ ------- \ -= ""'1' .0", l'i i e~ ' ff'!J ~ ! i --" j- I ' 1""'-" . -- --, ~ ) ,', "II ,,1\ - ' I] , I "< , , I _ ,I I ~@: I ~::;:;:::~ . rr - -~-. - " . ~~-- i 1'1 .~_J , 'e. ,:; , . , 11 (---~ ~--- ~ r--- 1 rf- ---", , .' L______J I 0" 0 "e I I ' 'I Ii --x-- r-- -"1 ".: I :' ..i :' t- . 0:: II r-~ ~ i e~ ! I : . 'lIT ' " ' ll~ : .~--, , " ; ", -' '. J n--- ---, ~e I ,__ ~__J IoH ~----"'~--.r-~ ._-..-- , . - . 1\ ~ .,:,i \ ........ JOl.,.. I ' 1_ ! ~...: i ~-:- _=;~! \ __ ' \ -----------I f1i12 -~1 ~] L_:>! ,) 'L~ H k. - @l ~' lie I l J:_:-_~__J ~ I 1 . I " r--- ---, ~L .' I ~T::~:::l mr! e! _~ '\ / \ I ,_~ ,1\1 r:::~-711~ '\ ,- 1 l ~l : _~: sr LL~_:'_J' r i,l .~ -~::"l ~ r 1- .. - -, '~q e_~~ ~ Iii ! I ! Ii) } \.=_ -- _ -~ I ~~~- :--~'\f 'I' :L~-11 W ~ 11:'<' ~/: . , ~11 , I ,.'J-' , -::-J '-I_ I' /fi (1:".7 , :S" 7~~' I :!~.\ 'e I 1 ~ I ~i'C 1 I .... \~ - - ~ '\~ rt I. -. 5~ ~ ! I~ ! il~ ;d - , I n ! , " .i;, ~ r--- ~-~ - il!ll: ~ i !!Jl!Co. · I',i- It I 1IIIjllll . Jj II ,] Ii'.'" : 1111 II I Il~1 ~UI;U~I i!(IJJCf! i ';" II Ij!iMiIJ~I~ : III i ~ilil i W"i'(Jl@.O I . g 1 ~ .~.... ;iri uu ".;:;: .;I 2';i ~ ~ J 11111=111:11; p~ "111 II! I I I \ \ unl .... I un "'I. "I' , Ii I B !~.,.0)-", ~~~J/ I: ! ~r. I IT"' l~l~i III \ I --"1 i 1!~... ., A., i: r\ 0'" ~~'r' "=~a"~ 3lS IS~~~~ ;i li~i~ .l lag~~ ~o ~ a > ....,.,..,..-... ii\ I I -<I~ 11 ~ ~;V I :;q tIIl'1 ~ o~ Cs ~~ 71 I (It:t ~. 6t11Z~ ~ D "lie) _,,, ~~" ~ l: III i,,, (~ I'lo]l :& g. .!:l D z- IJlJ2 !l!. -f~\ I~~ (,1 ~ ~ tTt hi r- ~ ~cii 0 rO l ~:;' o Z r 1..1 ~ ~) l!~!?- ~-1 hgg "'m"':':~ 1; ~ ~: iS~~ ~ l~ ,ifJ; //~ fmil~ !Iml Iml Ji j . ~ ~ '~~, 50' ~ . ~ l" ~~~ ~.. i,. !rZ-J LL ~ -~ fl:i~'il-il~i~;il'. nmHmH.'~ l~.. I ~ ~ ~~; ~ ~~~o;~ ~~I~h;t~ ~ It! " .~ !-:l- -," -~. . ;1 '.,',' ., ~ .<. ~~~ q I II t7I .1/1 , i:\ Ii .' ~ ~ h . . i ! ~ l i ; I ! S ~ 0 - c d~ . I ~ I~;~ i ,it ~ inn l ii~ i i "i! i / "",,~ \~._I / " ,j ~ \:: __,_,,'00_' - _['"'"3 , / , , ~,;.... .' ,,'~' r l .eUi:;' -i ,.,! f . " j~';t(.i ,,~p ,-- 49''' ~ I >" i~ !~ i: l~ ... ifi~ ".:;;:: / !!!I ~m 1 r~ ~. ~ I! 'tl ~ t'l g;S ~ a:: ~~ ~ . .. i.~~ llll~ ~ia 'tl ~~: S ..If.:" "'l Ii 0 ~ - ~_.~ _. I.'.. ::" V' .; ~ r-c~ ~d c ij' iiI IP.. ~ il {'"__ ...... :~ '~ "I j:. i! i~'.~ ~ Cl ~ i3l._ u U I f\) 8 :8 .,-- e 8 _. "0' _."~ 8 <J:l~ r-- gi ::; - < ~ e " f ,I ~! ' ::-: " ,. ;~ .~~ ';', .1.1 '!:: :i! I, ~ ~,. ~'IJif ,. 'II' II lid r- , - . ~ r' 1 Tr 8, ~"do:f'i:==H:; -i=dd" I;.3HS-- ~ 8'" :r;::' " 11 d..;.-. r,j ."' G , ~ '- fT~(I' .~ -~ - t) u U I --l. g: ~Z ,'0 ~(j) '0 )> f~ ['\ ! ~! ~ f j I t rOf~,ii9?~ ! ~ > .!' ;; C> m &':;l =< =< ~ ~ .!:..... > > <J:I \: C> z r .' ',i . :.,-, -'u ~ 'Z/ ~ ~.~. -::.:; ~ .~ IL~._ eJ a ~ .@ ~ .J~ c= ,---,-- -; -I ',..., -===- -- . i : .., .~~~.- _u--." ......cJ--;. _._~ ~2-~TREANO ~.o:.:Ys; -.L:__, ;:1' -:t..;; _!'.t: --f; i , ~i e 8 f t ~ ~T~ ; ~ :;.~ , i , , , , BLOCK, ,6 ...-: . ~ _"".. -:.:.;:':--' --..J ....- - jl,,' '-- u__ .-' ~ ~'~,," :~, 1- r'f; 8 . -t1 ie, ......2L. ~~ asi "'I : 1;U! ~ I~;' .,.! e~ - -~ ~ o il g I . ~ o il g ~ o ~ ~.c " : , -'6- - ":I,::...... I ~ ~ ; ! e J " , i 1 -- -i<~'" . ~ ~ -1 f. ," "'f'" '~""';'-,",,", ~I , , J: ::;. 0 "1"' 0 I ~ ,,: r: I ~ i., I':.: 8 ., --.................~ .'.,; c:. "% .,- "7-" ~ ~ ! i 4' I-~, rIal j I~! ~ -. ~ ....:.l.. - .w: I ~I:. T ~ i G "^ 'r~ I " .' , , t' , I;l: I -' e .' 0:11 '. r- 0 I ~ L.. "--"0........ r"" "->. ~ . e )" " '. ~e ~f ~~t~- I " C\ I,;::. '~~ ~ I' .1_, L i ~ ~ Ic- ~ o il '1l ~ ,- \ : " "\ ~,., , ~ ~ ~ r.:--~ ~~~~~OUP~ D'fC, ~ ..... ~Clittl ,:):.1"".."".1" ....... ~ sa~ F-(;1\"u.~ . .rSrfF~..'''''''F.''''''''''J"Io,,-..~01'''i,,.a' &i' .f:.~"" c.................,~!<.Im ~ ~t:!&!;?~/~'f/fm..us ~ I Ii' e I !~" If! I ';. . 'I. iH e .1 ~ , 'I ~ ~'l Iiill :.. i';!l I! !'l '. CAVEN SUBDIVISION MERIDIAN, IDAHO EXHIBIT C The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the requested Annexation and Zoning as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: Adopt the Comments and Recommendations of the Meridian'Planning & Zoning and Public Works Departments as follows: 1. The legal description submitted with the application (dated 1-23-04, stamped by D. Terry Peugh) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian and is approved. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 4. Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. EXHffiIT D The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the requested Preliminary Plat as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: A. Adopt the Special Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission as follows: 1. Modify Site Specific Condition of Approval #8 on page 11 of the staff report by requiring that a gate at the stub street, East Pisa Street, be installed the full width of the street. B. Adopt the Comments and Recommendations of the Meridian Planning & Zoning and Public Works Departments as follows: SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (pRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. All conditions of the Annexation and Zoning (AZ-04-018) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (pP-04-025). 2. Dedicate (or preserve) Locust Grove Road right-of-way in accordance with ACHD's requirements and provide a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along Locust Grove Road in accordance with MCC, outside of the ultimate right-of-way. The required street buffer along Locust Grove Road shall include 25-feet of landscaping. If the sidewalk along Locust Grove Road is constructed in the required landscape buffer lot as proposed, the width of the landscape buffer common lot shall be at least 30-feet wide to provide a full 25-feet of landscaping. The Chatsworth Homeowners' Association shall be responsible for maintaining said landscaping along Locust Grove Road. 3. Utilize common driveways for Lots 3-6, Block 5, and for Lots 12-15, Block 5. In accordance with MCC 11-9-1, the public street frontage for Lots 4, 5, 13, and 14, Block 5, may be reduced to 10-feet. Common drives serving 3 or 4 dwelling units shall be constructed a minimum of 24-feet wide, with crushed gravel and asphaltic concrete paving. Any portion of the flag lots for Lots 4,5, 13, and 14, Block 5 that are beyond the 24-foot wide driveway surface shall be landscaped. A note shall be placed on the face of the final plat stating the purpose of the common driveway easements and who is to be responsible for maintenance thereof. No parking signs shall be installed on the 2 proposed common driveways. Coordinate the location of the required signage with the Meridian Fire Department. 4. Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, vacate the 30-foot wide, east- west easement that bisects the property. 5. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized inigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized inigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approval. The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 6. All inigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per MCC 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate inigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 7. The submitted landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., Project Number 04096, dated 6-8-04 is approved with the following notes: · The street buffer along Locust Grove Road shall be shown in accordance with Site Specific Condition #2 above. · Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that are removed. · All areas being counted toward the 5% open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance. 12-13-14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. 8. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. Ifpermanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building permits. All fences shall taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. A gate at the stub street, East Pisa Street, shall be installed the full width of the street. 9. A minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes (measured off of the center line of the street). The two entrances shall be separated by no less than 11 the diagonal measurement of the project. Prior to issuance of the 51st building permit, a Fire Department approved secondary emergency access point to the site shall be provided. 10. Parking on Tiber Drive, where the street section is proposed at 33-feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) shall be limited to one side. Paint the curb red and install "No Parking" signs on one side of the bulb-out (Lot 1, Block 3) on Tiber Drive. 11. In accordance with MCC 4-1-11.B.4, the trash receptacles for Lots 3-6, and 12-15, Block 5, shall be located no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk for the adjacent street. SSC will not provide trash pick-up services utilizing the common driveway. The trash receptac1e(s) shall not cause a nuisance and shall be enclosed. 12. Sanitary sewer service to this site shall be via main line extensions from an existing main installed adjacent to the property. The applicant has preliminarily designed the sewer to flow out through the proposed Roseleaf Subdivision instead of flowing out to the existing trunk in Locust Grove. The applicant will be responsible to construct sewer mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 13. Domestic water service to this site shall be via main line extensions from mains installed adjacent to the property. The applicant will be responsible to construct water mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 14. Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to Locust G~ove Road. 15. No variances, exceptions or reductions to the City adopted dimensional standards or uses are approved with this preliminary plat application. All minimum lot sizes, structure setbacks, street frontage, and house size requirements shall be maintained. 16. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Chatsworth Homeowners' Association. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. Submit with the final plat application a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's approval letter for the subdivision name, and the lot and block numbering. Make any corrections necessary to conform. 4. A letterof credit or cash surety in the ~ount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. 5. A detailed landscape and fencing plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 6. Coordinate fIre hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 7. Two-hundred-fifty and one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 8. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 9. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected and analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period of time not to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a lOa-year storm events. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3:1. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies determining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above groundwater. 10. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 11. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 12. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 13. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. 14. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the final plat per Resolution 02-374. 15. All lot, parcel and tract sizes shall meet the mlmmum dimensional standards as established in the zoning ordinance. 16. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provisions or terms of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 17. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. C. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following regarding Locust Grove Road: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 35-feet from centerline (an additionall O-feet) of right-of-way along Locust Grove Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Locust Grove Road, located a minimum of 28-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Locust Grove Road, located a minimum of28-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Locust Grove Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct all of the internal streets as 36-foot street sections within 50-feet ofright-of- way with rolled curb, gutter, and 5-foot concrete sidewalks, as proposed. 3. Any landscape islands or medians shall be owned and maintained by the homeowner's association. Notes of this are required on the final plat. 4. Construct Claymont Street, the main entrance, to intersect Locust Grove Road approximately 285-feet south of the north property line (measured property line to centerline) . 5. Construct Sartreano Avenue as a stub street connection to the north property line to connect to Roseleaf Subdivision. This roadway is located approximately 670-feet west of Locust Grove (measured centerline to centerline). 6. Construct S. Chatsworth Avenue to the south property line as a stub street to the 23-acre parcel. This street shall be located approximately 520-feet (measured centerline to centerline) east of the west property line. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating that, lITHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 7. Construct E. Pisa Street to the east property line as a stub street to the 4.99-acre parcel. This street shall be located approximately 125-feet north of the south property line. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 8. Construct a stub street to the west property line. This street shall not be aligned with E. Tiber Drive. The stub street shall be located centrally between E. Tiber Drive and E. Pisa Street, intersecting with Bigham Avenue. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 9. Provide two traffic calming devices (chokers, stamped concrete pedestrian crossing, landscaped median, etc.) on E. Tiber Drive: one located at the intersection with S. Sartreano Avenue and one located at the intersection with S. Chatsworth Avenue OR provide a choker on E. Tiber Drive centrally located between S. Chatsworth Avenue and S. Sartreano Avenue. The applicant shall coordinate the exact location and design with District Traffic Services Staff. lO. Other than the access that is specifically approved with this application, direct lot access to Locust Grove Road is prohibited and shall be noted on the final plat. 11. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with fIle number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved inwriting by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. ' 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare arid certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance # 198, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within 1he right-of- way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. D. Adopt the Meridian Fire Department Recommendations as follows: 1. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 lh" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. 2. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shaIl be required to have an approved turn around. 3. Provide a 20' wide Fire Lane for all internal & external roadways. 4. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside. 5. The roads shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards and shall have a clear driving surface, available at aU times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shaU have no parking. Streets with a 33' street width shall have parking only on one side (portion of Tiber Drive. near Locust Grove Road). No Parking signs and red-painted curbs will be required. 6. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. 7. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. 8. A minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the pro;ect. which serves more than 50 homes. This shall be measured off of the center line of the street. The two entrances shall be separated by no less than ~ the diagonal measurement of the proj ect. 9. The proposed 77-10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 223 residents at build out. 10. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 11. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this instaUation is to be borne by the developer. 12. No Parking signs and painted curbs will be required for all Fire Lanes. No parking signs shall be installed on the 2 proposed common driveways. Coordinate the location of the required signage with the Meridian Fire Department. E. Adopt the Recommendations ofthe Central District Health Department as follows: 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Deparhnent of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. F. Adopt the Recommendations of Nampa Meridian Irrigation District as follows: 1. The Preliminary Plat indicates that pressure irrigation will be supplied. IfNampa & Meridian Irrigation District is to own and operate the system a Land Use Change Application will be required. If the District is not to own and operate it than there will be no impact on the District by this proposed development and no further review is necessary. G. Adopt the Recommendations ofthe Sanitary Services Company as follows: 1. In accordance with MCC 4-1-11.BA, the trash receptacles for Lots 3-6, and 12-15, Block 5 shall be located no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk for the adjacent street. SSC will not provide trash pick-up services utilizing the common driveway. The trash receptacle(s) shall not cause a nuisance and shall be enclosed. EXHIBIT E The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff: ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment. " The following is the list of standards found in J 1-15-11 and analysis by staff: A. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment; Staff finds that the proposed zoning designation, R-8. is harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates the land to be Medium Density Residential. There is a minimum target density of three dwelling units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan; the proposed gross density of Chatsworth Subdivision is 3.97 dwelling units per acre. The Future Land Use Map shows a future community park in this square mile. However, the Parks Department is not seeking to acquire any land from the applicant. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; Staff does not anticipate that the applicant intends to rezone the subject property in the future. There are several large, undeveloped county parcels to the west and south of this land and additional annexation/rezone requests are anticipated on these parcels in the future. . C. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning -for example, a residential area turning into a commercial area by means of conditional use permits; Staff finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision would be allowed within the requested zoning district of R-8. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land would be developed in lot sizes, housing types and other dimensional requirements that conform to the proposed zoning designation. D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new railroad access been developed or planned or adj acent area being developed in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area; Staff finds that the land directly north and east of the subject property is annexed and approved for development similar to the proposed subdivision (Roseleaf Subdivision and Tuscany Lakes Subdivision). Tuscany Village Subdivision and Sageland Subdivision were also recently approved residential developments in the area. Tuscany Lakes Subdivision is located near the southwest comer of Locust Grove Road and Victory Road and Sageland Subdivision is on the northeast comer of Locust Grove Road and Victory Road. The majority of Section 30, Township 3 North, Range 1 East is designated for residential.development similar to the proposed project. This is the third annexation application the City has processed within the northeast quarter of Section 30. Locust Grove Road is designated as a Section Line Road on the Functional Street Classification Map. This section of Locust Grove Road abutting the site is not currently programmed within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements. E. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; The existing charaCter of the area will, and is, currently changing, especially upon build-out of the proposed project and other similar subdivisions in the general vicinity. Staff finds that the proposed R-8 zoning and subsequent single-family residential uses proposed in the preliminary plat are consistent with the intended character of the vicinity, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Staff also finds that the proposed zoning/uses can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be hannonious with and appropriate in appearance with the existing and intended character of the surrounding area. Although there will be an impact of the subject development on the existing character of the area (agricultural), staff finds that the impact is consistent with the intended character of the area; a mix of low and medium density residential. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony (oral and written) to determine whether or not the proposed zoning and subsequent uses will be disturbing or hazardous to the existing or future neighboring uses. Staff does not anticipate that the proposed residential uses will be hazardous as long as landscaping, fencing and the other conditions outlined in this report are complied with and construction traffic and house construction is conducted in a manner consistent with City Code. G. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services; Sanitary sewer and water to serve this development is currently available in Locust Grove Road, however, the applicant has preliminarily designed the sewer to flow out through the proposed Roseleaf Subdivision. The applicant shall be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees as well as construct on-site storm water drainage facilities. On August 11, 2004, the ACHD Commission approved this development with site-specific and standard conditions. Please review the ACHD report for additional information regarding this finding. On July 23, 2004, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. A concern about secondary emergency access to this site has been raised by the Meridian Fire Department. See Site Specific Condition # 9 in the Preliminary Plat section ofthis report, and the detailed comments and conditions from agencies attending the comments meeting at the end of this report. Staff finds that the public services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The Commission and Council should reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by the Meridian Police and Fire Departments, or any other public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project. NOTE: Sanitary Service Company (SSC) will not enter privately owned common driveways in residential subdivisions to pick-up trash. MCC 4-1-11.B.4 requires all trash cans "be placed as close to the curb as possible, or in alleys if the property has alley access. The solid waste containers shall be clear of pedestrian and vehicular traffic at all times. Solid waste containers shall be clearly visible and accessible to the waste collection personnel and free from obstructions including, but not limited to, trees, shrubbery, fences, vehicles, and walls." The impact of this ordinance on Lots 12-15, and Lots 3-6, Block 5, is that property owners will have to haul their trash cans from the residence to the public street. SSC is requesting a condition that all trash cans for Lots 3-6, and 12-15, Block 5, be placed no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk off the adjacent public street. (See Preliminary Plat Site Specific Condition #11) H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police and school facilities and services. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the rezone will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. I. Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff finds that the proposed annexation and the development of single-family homes on this site will not involve uses that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area. ACHD projects this development will generate 760 additional vehicle trips per day. Staff recognizes the fact that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this subdivision; however, staff does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. Staff does not anticipate the proposed annexation and subsequent uses will create excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. J. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; The location of the proposed new entry road, Tiber Drive, has been approved by ACHD. Tiber Drive is located approximately 285-feet from the Tuscany Lakes Subdivision entry road (palermo Drive) on the east side of Locust Grove Road. Further, the applicant is proposing to extend a stub street from Roseleaf Subdivision to provide access to the site, limiting the amount of interference with traffic on surrounding classified streets. lfthe two proposed vehicular approaches are constructed as approved by ACHD, staff does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. Please review the ACHD report for this project for additional information regarding this finding. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and Staff finds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approving the annexation and rezone. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)? Staff finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in substantial compliance with the City's comprehensive plan (medium density residential). The land east and north of the subject property has already been annexed and this is a logical expansion of existing zoning and land uses. In accordance with the findings listed above, stafffinds that the annexation/rezone of this propertv would be in the best interest of the City. EXHIBIT F The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff: PRELIMINARY PLAT FINDINGS AND REQUIREMENTS Sections 12-3-3 1.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance of a proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Staff finds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adopted Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan (Chapter VII). The proposed density, 3.97 dwelling units per acre (gross), is in compliance with the land use classification, medium density residential, noted on the map. B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See finding "G" under Annexation and Zoning Analysis for more detail. ) C. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public fmancial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e. police, fire, ACHD, etc) to determine this finding. (See finding "G" under Annexation and Zoning Analysis above, and the Agency Comments and Conditions at the end of this report for more detail.) E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. Staff is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Councilor Commission's attention. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis; ACHD staff has approved this subdivision, with conditions. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is unaware. October 1 , 2004 PP 04-025 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 5, 2004 APPLICANT Dyver Development, LLC ITEM NO. 5-8 REQUEST Findings - Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R--8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: ,,~r1 rU'v n n /0 JLf} Emailed: ~v< Date: I O~ Staff Initials: Phone: fl1/lft Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW .AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.40 Acres to R-8 and a Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of Seventy-Seven Building Lots and Four Other Lots on 19.40 Acres in a Proposed R-8 Zone for Chatsworth Subdivision, by Dyver Development, LLC. Case No(s). AZ-04-018, PP-04-025 For the City Council Hearing Date of: September 21, 2004 RECEIVED OCT 0 7 2004 qty Of Meridian CIty Clerk Office A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code ~67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the September 21,2004 public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were.given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Written and oral testimony was received on this matter, as reflected in the records ofthe City Clerk (for written testimony) and in the official meeting minutes (for ora~ testimony). c. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code ~67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code ~~ 11-15-5 and 11-17-5 as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-04-018, PP-04-025 - PAGE 1 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is Dyver Development, LLC. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits E and F for the findings required for each type of application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. S67- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6,2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code ~ 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Preliminary Plat dated 06-09-04 as shown in Exhibit B and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibits C and D. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-04-0 18, PP-04-025 - PAGE 2 Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's Preliminary Plat as evidenced by having submitted the Preliminary Plat is hereby conditionally approved; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Twelve (12) Month Preliminary Plat Duration Please take notice that after the date of approval of the preliminary plat, the owner or developer shall have one year within which to file the request for approval of the final plat. After approval of final plat, the owner or developer shall have one year to begin construction of the public utilities and one year thereafter to complete construction of those public facilities. (MCC 12-2-4.B & C.) E. Notice afFinal Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body ofthe City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek ajudicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Deed and Legal Description (3) Exhibit B: Approved Site/Landscape Plan (3) Exhibit C: Annexation and Zoning Conditions of Approval Exhibit D: Preliminary Plat Conditions of Approval Exhibit E: Annexation and Zoning Findings Exhibit F: Preliminary Plat Findings CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS). AZ-04-018, PP-04-025 - PAGE 3 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 5-\-h ot-+o beY"" , 2004. day of COUNCILMAN SHAUN WARDLE VOTED tfvv _COT J:NCILM...^~N BILL ~T A RY vrYT'ED COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED ~ VOTED~ COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE MAYOR TAMMYdeWEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED - ~ & ~ -;. Q ",os 0 ~ ~ i'.o u,sr 1Si ' -<'" $' 1- ':.1 ,,('\ 't(' ,~ "'",,/ f"\".. \V ,......' //I,,"-UUNT"f ' ,.,.." Copy served upon Applicant, The Planni~g;mufzgcing Department, Public Works Deparbnent Attest: and City Attorney. BY:~ ~mu ity Clerk Dated: 10-12-04 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). AZ-04-0 18, PP-04-025 - PAGE 4 EXHIBIT A See Attached Deed and Legal Description (3 pages) JUN. 14,2004 10: 55AM".' ~- . eX C/c,zt:tstS'" -~'::ttf~ ,~-l rl r6< -, A~' NO r~ n:JT J..-.:-' ..1- . - .~ -..J 0) P. 4 ,-; APWlurCnmpmy PIONEER TITLE COMPANY OF ADA COUNIT 8151 W. RiflernanAve. J Boise, Idaho 83704- (208) 377-2700 r ADA GfJUNTY R!IlORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO BOISE IOAKO GlillI3llI. o.4:W PM DEPIJTY Joanne Hoop!, RECORDED -REllUEST OF Pilllleer aMDUNT 6.00 111111111I III Iff 1IIIUlIIJlIIIIJ II III l€l41369373 WARRANTY DEED For Value Received Jetty L. Caven &: MurielJ. Caven, husblmd m3d wife herti:nafter ref~d to as Grantor, does hereby grant, blu'gain, $elI, warrant and convey IlIlW Dyver Development LLC hllteinafter refm-ed to as GmJ;u:e, whose current addrc:ls lsiQ )::, 1'Lammn IW.. Soo. ie, Meri~. ID 83642 the folIDwing de5c:ribed pr~eJ, to-wit: ~77 e. . tJveJU ~ r)f<i'JVII4--t-r SEE EXHIBIT A A'ITACHED HERE1'O AND MADE A PART HarnOF'. To HA. VE AND TO aOLD the $aid premises, with their app~s unto th~ ~aid Grantee, his ~in; and assigns forever. AJ:1d the said Grantor does hereby coven3tlt to lll1d with the said Grantee, that Gtenmr is the owner in fce simple of said premises; that sAid premises ~ ~ from all enCl1JJlbronces C1'.ctpc current ycm tlXe.!, levies, lll1d assessmenl.$, and except U.S. P!ltCI1t reservations, restrict.iOtlS, ~ of record, and e$Se:ments visil:tle upon thc premises, and that GrantorwilI vmrant and defilnd the same frQtll. all c~ wbats~ve:r. Dated: J~ 2, 2004 7171~L a.. C.A'J.4'~) MurielJ. cavenV' STATE OF IDAHO. County of ADA., ss. On this 2M day of June, in the year oi2004, before l;Il& the undersigned,. notary public per~Ol:\ally appeared Jell)' L. CavClll1llld Muriel J. Caven known or identified to me to be the pl~ons whose names are subscrib~ to the within inslroment, and acknowledged tD me that th~ eltccutcd the SiIllC. :\,......UI-t"f", .......... C ~ M ,.;.~~" .:-" .....~ ......... 1'.. '.... :'Ilr ."'-\-~, -....._.,. ~ d!?" ... <PO.... ~ ~ ~ .. ~ ; "OT.1,J?}-\-;t.\ =::*:.... :: ; i ..... : * = ~ ... ~O:eL\C I ~ ~~... .. ~ ~.A.. ..O~ ~ . T l'. ........ ~ ....Iti '..#,~;lJ OF 1"0 ~ ............ II''''nll'''.'''' Notary Public ofIdllho Residing lit COIlIlIIission exp~s; ~ ~l)5-10.0s FlMi':ing in BoM. ldeJ'\O 2 ].. "'\ JUN. 1 (2004 10: 56;w ~..... "-" 61ft[ ~ Pr( ~~~ITA~ \ '34 ~ r ~ ";. A pmcl ofLmdlying in the Saathhalfofthe Northeastqua:rter OfSectio1l30, ToW1lSi1ip 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada. County, IdMo, more partic1ilirly ~ M follows: Commeo.cing atthe Southeast oozncr of the Northe;ut q,llJ1rtcr (t.h8 East quarter ~er) of Section 30, Tl)Wl:IS/:Lip:3 North, Range lEast, Boise Meridillll; Thence North 00 &grees 13'5&" East 381.43 feehlong tho East line of the Northeast q~ of said Section 30 to a point; Thence SoUth &9 degrees 43'S2~ West 33.00 feet parallel with the South line of the Northeast quarter to a point on the Westerlrtight-<lf..way line of Locust Grove Road, said point being thr: REAL POINT OF BEGlNNIN"G of this description; TheJ:u:e South 89 degr=$43'22" West 571. II fettto apoim:; Thence South 00 degre~ ]3'59" West: 38 1.35 futto a point an the Soutl1 line of the Nortb=t qtllIIter; Thence along the South line to the NorthellSt quarter, Thence South 39 degrees 4S '52" West 1035.20 feetto apointoA the Wffil~oftb.eEasthalfof the Southeast quarter of the Southwest quarter oflM Northeut quarter; Thence North 00 degrees 00'0'" East 661.18 feetto the Nonhwest Cottlet' of the E~ haIf oftbe Southeast g:amer of the Southwest. quarter oithe Northeast quarter; Thence North 89 degrees, 43 '22" East 1608.98 feet along the North line ofllie South half oithe 80mb. half of the Northeast quamr to a point on the Westerly ri8ht-of-way Iin.e of Locust Grove Road; The:nce South 00 de~eeg 13'59" Wesr280.00 feet parallel wirh the fa$! line Ofthll Northeast quarter ;UODg the Westerly rlght-of-way line ofLlcum: Grove Road the REAL POINT OF BEGINNlNG. p, 5 IDAHO SURVEY GROUP E"f-1-fI6:L\ A @ 1450 East Watertower St. Suite 150 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone (208) 846-8570 Fax (208) 884-5399 Project No. 04-120 RUT to R-8 Proposed Chatsworth Subdivision June 14, 2004 A parcel ofland located in the South Y2 ofthe South 12 of the NE ~ of Section 30, T. 3N., R. IE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the comer common to Sections 19,20,29, and the said Section 30, from which the ~ comer common to said Sections 29 and 30 bears South 00014'19" West, 2645.60 feet; thence South 00014'19" West, 1984.20 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING.. Thence continuing South 00014'19" West, 279.95 feet; Thence South 89042'09" West, 603.89 feet; Thence South 00015'58" West, 381.14 feet to a point on the East-West mid-section line; Thence along said line South 89043'55" West, 1035.14 feet; Thence North 00000'34" East, 661.03 feet to a point on the North line of the South Y2 of the South Y2 of the NE ~; Thence along said line North 89043'10" East, 1641.82 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 19.62 acres, more or less. Prepared By: Idaho Survey Group, P.c. '~EV~~~lL ' "/ JUN282oo4 MERlOiAJlll :PUBLIC WORKS ;OEPT. Professional Land Surveyors r EXHIBIT B See Attached Site/Landscape Plan (3 Pages) <-- 'liTT - ---FfllJ Ii- ~ ! ,-I ,~ I II'~ I . ; ~ ~ i f ~ I; j .. ~ I r-- ).;- - 1%)--""" ~ '!'I\!I-nl;.~ '11 !Il -,1-1 <_ _ h ;~iiiv jt ! : I i [HI) I I i 1/ ! ! j I J I r. .". ~ i r I I I f~&lfUlm:mIllHn II.' Iii Illiiill~l: I 1'1 Ii! IJ ~J ij ~ Ii r ~ I ~aJ.f/I1@).. I "If 1'" : 1I1I1luQP: 12; J!n! .h : I ~It iJl <> AI; ~~1'I' O~ C ~~rf ! PI r - > bw Z! S Q ~c: > lor> ~ ~~ J'. _ _ 1'1 8;u ;i a 's ~ z - ~ ~ ~I ~ E. ~~ u~~.[ .. ~ ;;;,: m ... r- i' .2 ~ '=' rO'll "';;j" 02 Wi li ~ ~r ..~ ". Fl! ) ;;~ ~ · -I Hg g Q''''' mJ "",'f:; ~!I ! ; lii~~ Hili ~ ~j~ li ~ '~i ~ '1.~~;: ~j:T t ~(f\ v: /~7-..J \._ -.~:-c.....-- " I fl' - .. 7. ~i, ~-.".-<--: _.~d 2~_. ,./,.L /. :-:-' ~ - ~P:-~nIJ-~rr~ ' r~:;r-u:;( / - i(:. "" ~ l~ -r1 .t1~ V1 i0~! i~; : \Jp fl = ~,. "e ,lYe :, "@' 1 eI" rf: r I~I LC.____~ / <1'.' ">v~~-=~J L_' _J L_';_J r~J L_J:"_...l ! t' - -, !;,' e /~- '" ,/ 'e!! I~__J ! - - ..t-....-..rJlt:"1.C - ,- '-T, .. ---~ .--\ >I:~"-' C -... 'V-'- '-ilrt-~ "111'('- -f'1 'I r-- _ -"~[f '@)'@Vi'e""-"0,,@,L'[ . 'r 1 i II j II i ;'1 i It i ~ " l . ~ :=Z1 I~' I; I: . :, .:-J:J ;; 1: . J 11 ~:---::1 ;. e;. ~ ! r-~=-l ~~ f=-~~f=~=lff-I;~IJ~-=;-l. :nJ : ~ ! __!~' _: I i @ ~ ' :;.,:, j :1, ,,;, :Iij , ,;,: ' :@ i I I! ~ I I ~ II II ~ H.- I '..!!I I II, . I I _Il ___.J I ':t::'--;;._...J ~ ---..... \...---.... Lf-s........ ____J.'i , l .....___J "'i. 'or 1 _ - r-- - t ! @ ~, - .C'--':'~~ " -: e! -j (!) "::--::~ . ,I ("cg,--1 r-~I :i~ -6'1 I' ~::---"" '\ f ;'" Ii i !" i !, ,';' ! i. j,i ~c,~ '\ C-_r_4 . ! I L____~ L__" c~_~_ -\-----' J ::~ H - - 4l> I f-....1 - n--l- - -1 "'I I ! I I. : i ", "j i: '., , I :--~-;;1, : ! I ! @ : : I e I' ~. r-- -:-l:: ,:' , ~ F . I L____-' __ L!:~ ~___.J. ! f ! e! ' : L ---.... j ~ --., ~- e~ r.- L______ / li:~-! d1 ; It j ! ~ i J I "J:I . ~-- _ - L.Il :} , 'I Ii" ,I 1. i :@! .Ir"-"f--- 1 .;~i J--~J - _J e LL J - _ J ~ ~ II I' e r : iJ.1 f 1"'1 F(~:;" 1 · )'1 ~i @)!, t. ___..I. I I @ i .. ~ r b Ie: I ' ., _.-'"~ 1 I' I '- " L ---- , / i, 0 ~ : L:::-' 1 I ~:- :-~ . i I Lf~ ~ (: " 1 ~i i 01. :. "0i"! i- =- L .-J.~c " lJJ1 ~ ',' ~ ~------; I __~' _J ' ,I, '~:@ i : 7f ---, - - " _': i...... I ell ~-~-;: ..............J l___~__J : i ,j (0-1Ir6'--' r- e -1;-1 t- ---'I - fU u; ".: ~ !~ ...i : I.. I! e: I ",-,_ 1--.,...-- ~ ! e~ : fi : ' I, . I I . LI ~ I >_, L___....__J :f.H L_n_J l._~ :!'__~__J fT - -- , ~0! ' ~i ,...,i \ · r=r. -... IN ~! @j"! j ~:~ --;~ ') ~ n rr -: ~I' e i ' I J \ \ 'e" fi. L~_' 1 L l<f'~_ - '. Eiil ~ J, i " ,~ ! t!1 ~ I I : 1 . e I U __ .. ILl' r -- --, ~ ' lrT-:~::::l Ie!: '\ (/ '\ ~ f~::~- -1 II f-~7S: : 1 . ~ "If LX_~___~ L..L__ ...J ,r--~~--"l lj f 1-- i" ., , , : e , r fl. <g) ) l;__ --... -~ I L.!.__ __.J \ I 1 In@ l. i : ~ I' ~~ , i~ I ,~.'~_. . 1'_ 1 ,ko (!"' , :~ , k~! : J~ .' --! ~(j) T \. ~I II! · ~ -lp".-, ;;i; Un i;: i - i t~ I; i\ ~~Pi;S I; -I a > g I . . i ! ~ ~ . li ~ ;U ~ i S q ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ . ~ - - . " -.,. nnl I_"'--~ r .~.. I I nn ;a: ~~ ~ ~. , ........~ ,.. - ~ -'1Il , "' ~~ ~~.~ --i V ." "-~-j H t:..l l~'Egl'\Jn i ~~~ ! . 'if:" 1 '" i~iiil' gm~ Iml Oi 1, ~"p~ i~~~! ~l~ J .. . -'t,:;:< I!~',;;; . JO~ .~.- ~.; ;~ ~ ! K l 1 -:. - .;!1.' il~I~'iifmll~II...n'HnHi~ I~. iT -- ~-. ~ ~ij~~f!.~~I~!t::~ 0:: ~ ~ ~ a ~~ a i~:. :.r ~ :i - . ~ ~.' , I II : ' ~ "' t,/'~~' ./ 'i~. i '%_-_.1 , , , ,/ I " I >"' I~ != i: l> i~ ~!E n ~, 1 "~ I I h" " ~ c .- .-'-. -..-' - .r;- ~.;/ " ..,4' r I{ I ,'- ~ :ti:/I { .- I~-::y; J ~~?;,/ . .<::::: / ml m: I r'~~ I" . ;f I! ~ e:i C ;t ~ ~e~ 3 ~I~ll ""' .~: 5 ~g- Q~ ":;j rill 0 n ~ ~ ~ R 'a ~ I~ .j ''F':~ : l~. Ilj iL !~ -" ..-. (2) _.";.)l.," ;;:;: -,. i. ~ ; ~; 11 ,,, ! I, . !!~ " ::0 c q >,;;' :'Q s~ ~ {l ._ ":::':'l j:: ILL ~':'.~ [!d -, Cl .i~ ~._ Q ~ P\ I ., \2J ,<; ) I!' U Iii, Ii ," }1" i~ 4_. - t... 11@ ..._~ .':';' ~ :? I li';j .~1 f " iiL_ 11 "@ ..L .< - - -'';.1 ,i..!. +______ ~ - ,-- -- .~~. 'jRli;," ~ - - - .11<1 ~ . i ~~b; ~" ~ n ~ '.,'-~ -- - -- _._~~ 81 ;~ ;";,1.>.. , "1 ! 8,- -rj;;~ s 1; ~ ., -: - ...,,, ;;:}. " :', CJ Cl)~ 8 (~ ~~ ~~:~---'~ ~; !: ~ ~ z i i: 0: .'0:.. ',""~ ~ en;.:; G ' T..!'hI +0" ,... 'J >'- T", -0 ~ m" --- ii! -0--- Jl,~ ~; e i. : ~=~H'1! --= _,I J1 ' ~ 6 laill ~ ~ ~ ! , 0> j >.i f ~ I~ ~ i ~ ~' !- \J \J I I'\) ! ~ l , '" j ~ ~ m -0 ); Z 8 ~ .ff -' / -1 :.0;., ':. T' :-: .~l i m ,': if- I. 'f I i ! i i ;;-~ .',"';' ~! " M i I) I I' , ~' 1 ., i 11, i I " I :..,' .,. "' ", I i/ rl'~~ I . }! "'" Ul i . :!>' ! (In; i,l ):-'.1 ; , "'?- -. - " 8 ~ v~ ~~~~it~~OUPI lNC. -' . :~~~rf,'"Z:~~""; = . ~~q C'~r.rl"U fr....~...." Ji:- cr.;'....'..,1\.1 __ W' .f:ri;;^,* c.>ttv:o""'."",..... ~ ~irJtf!;~~~;.J~~l}/jl~I-{m , r -=r- , l' 11 J 1""') \_ , ::~."-7f __1.. BLOCK ::J" I ~ f . ~ ~ ~ g 8 I l0f~fi~_=~.:-,~ "-:-'~ "'-~ -- ~ - r-- - I' -- - -- ". [~ . ~r ~" ~ ~ i '" , II!.;.. e : I .... .;;. e~_';. G ?-= =-s:.:."', ~- .....: ""1 U 1-, "\ 1) -:1 I ~-!i ---:.:7f-r II l: 1-:- --:'"f'- , . I-,.,t"'- ,..' n.' '~ ,( ,-,. vt' ; r; G j/ j' ~jf - (, u,~ _ ~';; I ';a: " 'Q ~. b ' f ~ ";; I : ~ .!. : ~- " , e : e ~! 0 :~ J~ ~g ,H @ l ' 0_; '_~O__.,",,~ !LA ,-- .;"]~~ -- _ - --r" f 8" }, II ' "'--""n ..-,;j. : r ;. CAVEN SUBDIVISION MERIDIAN, IDAHO , , @ ~; @ __ .:...;,..u. __ .~ -.., --~ ..~ <:n r- - Cl Q ~ ~ ~" '(,1 ; ! (;. ~ .~:t.:... _.... .R !~ -;; hi. I'~ 'if Ie:: - ir~ ..~ ~ ! ttJ: ~ ,--.' C:l Q "-, ., ;!, c~~~ m-:::2? ~ j 1m G . ~ --<, ffi! "'I l;l;li I~~ -~ '," ~ e 6 ?":l ,', ~ "- i ! J"" ,. C ...!:!!L....:.. ., ;.-L; I l . ~-'I-~-' "1 "'11. '. ~ ;- I i :t ,., I I +il~' - ~. ......:.- 8,; -. .z:'\dd-~l':::~H:; - --,=ddl=~H~-- ~ e (. .__nL=:'::::;:: .,.1 .__..__......_. .-:'1' " ~. _ __'on "~ " 8 oS:' i:.' ~-f: ! (0 G , 1 I ! .d '" U4. ~ ~ i-,:~~ 8 ., " .~ J, i~ ~~ l:'i : i , , ~ ! ! i -_.~:r'"' -- ~o;-. BLOCK .~>r- _..J ,6 '"'---- - ,. .- t, i ~e , , >. ~'7;,y - -;....~_ ....J L. ~. ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ '- L~ -OJ:''' . _ ~ ~ !' I ~ ,~! 1 1 :~ e i:..; i , i i - --- ,-.- - ! ~'W'C 'i-'."'c< b; 1 I" I, , . ! 1 , G i ;, "I- ! o. i I" - .. , "00":1.. , i .. .' 1~1 ] e iO' " c i 01 - ~ , ! ~QL <' I .- .....-:\ j rei-. ~ '6 I f:1 "' e 1&:, i i 1 L . "" L r ,.- >..~ . - ':;' i:, )";., , ' ;' W:' ~:I~ f ", } ~ I~ I) n;: :z ,'0 ~0? '(") )> 0 "tl ~ .m "tl i S .. z ~ . e ~ \ i ~ ; r ~ f , ! f t ~ i1 ~ I :;; f . ~ u g ~ r u Ol " ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 '" ::g .....l. ." ~ '" ~'" f.''''-_~ THE LAND GROUP, lNC. ~ ~ -"" .~t""J '/rm<Lt~i'lM'r _J.."''''"'~11:1lrr-:Il-' ".:Atr J1laA....., ..... . t:.{f CrlI.:/fTl 1~~.t1..~JfI ~ .-..,.............n,. ~.~r.::pt\H-'"r........_............ --~ ~ r~7/J l{;..!:i1";:; ~~'ffm~Nll , ":i'W<t'ltl~tt CAVEN SUBDIVISION MERIDIAN, IDAHO I : I ! ~ . n ~.. -',..' ':'i~- " i'1 ~ Goo -.- .';.'.-- 8" e ~ D Q I L.... ....-_~ f' -- -- ~:. '" ". ~ e )- " ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ 1.1 f ~ I~ h~ .. h':: ~. !1 i [ Ii ~ ~ fh I ~ ~ll,!i. ---- nu !~!l EXHmIT C The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the requested Annexation and Zoning as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: Adopt the Comments and Recommendations of the Meridian'Planning & Zoning and Public Works Departments as follows: 1. The legal description submitted with the application (dated 1-23-04, stamped by D. Terry Peugh) shows the property as contiguous to the existing corporate boundary of the City of Meridian and is approved. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can't be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the Meridian City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 4. Any future subdivision, uses and construction on this property shall comply with the City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time. EXHffiIT D The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the requested Preliminary Plat as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application) subject to the following: A. Adopt the Special Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission as follows: 1. Modify Site Specific Condition of Approval #8 on page 11 of the staff report by requiring that a gate at the stub street, East Pisa Street, be installed the full width of the street. B. Adopt the Conunents and Reconunendations of the Meridian Planning & Zoning and Public Works Departments as follows: SITE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. All conditions of the Annexation and Zoning (AZ-04-018) application shall also be considered conditions of the Preliminary Plat (PP-04-025). 2. Dedicate (or preserve) Locust Grove Road right-of-way in accordance with ACHD's requirements and provide a 25-foot wide landscape buffer along Locust Grove Road in accordance with MCC, outside of the ultimate right-of-way. The required street buffer along Locust Grove Road shall include 25-feet of landscaping. If the sidewalk along Locust Grove Road, is constructed in the required landscape buffer lot as proposed, the width of the landscape buffer common lot shall be at least 30-feet wide to provide a full 25-feet of landscaping. The Chatsworth Homeowners' Association shall be responsible for maintaining said landscaping along Locust Grove Road. 3. Utilize common driveways for Lots 3-6) Block 5, and for Lots 12-15, Block 5. In accordance with MCC 11-9-1, the public street frontage for Lots 4, 5, 13, and 14, Block 5, may be reduced to IO-feet. Common drives serving 3 or 4 dwelling units shall be constructed a minimum of 24- feet wide, with crushed gravel and asphaltic concrete paving. Any portion of the flag lots for Lots 4,5, 13, and 14, Block 5 that are beyond the 24-foot wide driveway surface shall be landscaped. A note shall be placed on the face of the final plat stating the purpose of the common driveway easements and who is to be responsible for maintenance thereof. No parking signs shall be installed on the 2 proposed common driveways. Coordinate the location of the required signage with the Meridian Fire Department. 4. Prior to signature of the final plat by the City Engineer, vacate the 3D-foot wide) east- west easement that bisects the property. 5. The applicant has not indicated who will own and operate the pressurized irrigation system within this development. Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all lots within this development. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year-round source of water. If the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to remain a private homeowners' association system, complete plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual shall be submitted prior to plan approval. The applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If a surface or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the City Engineer. 6. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per MCC 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association (ditch owners), with written approval or non-approval submitted to the Public Works Department. If lateral users association approval can not be obtained, plans will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to final plat signature. 7. The submitted landscape plan prepared by The Land Group, Inc., Project Number 04096, dated 6-8-04 is approved with the following notes: · The street buffer along Locust Grove Road shall be shown in accordance with Site Specific Condition #2 above. · Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that are removed. · All areas being counted toward the 5% open space requirement shall be free of "wet ponds" or other such nuisances. All stormwater detention facilities incorporated into the required open space are subject to Ordinance,12-13-14 and shall be fully vegetated with grass and trees, as depicted on the submitted landscape plan. 8. A detailed fencing plan shall be submitted upon application of the final plat. Ifpermanent fencing is not provided, temporary construction fencing to contain debris must be installed around the perimeter prior to issuance of building permits. All fences shall taper down to 3 feet maximum within 20 feet of all right-of-way. All fencing should be installed in accordance with MCC 12-4-10. A gate at the stub street, East Pisa Street, shall be installed the full width of the street. 9. A minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the project, which serves more than 50 homes (measured off of the center line of the street). The two entrances shall be separated by no less than ~ the diagonal measurement of the project. Prior to issuance of the 51 st building permit, a Fire Department approved secondary emergency access point to the site shall be provided. 10. Parking on Tiber Drive, where the street section is proposed at 33-feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) shall be limited to one side. Paint the curb red and install "No Parking" signs on one side of the bulb-out (Lot 1, Block 3) on Tiber Drive. 11. In accordance with MCC 4-1-11.B.4, the trash receptacles for Lots 3-6, and 12-15, Block 5, shall be located no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk for the adjacent street. SSC will not provide trash pick-up services utilizing the common driveway. The trash receptacle(s) shall not cause a nuisance and shall be enclosed. 12. Sanitary sewer service to this site shall be via main line extensions from an existing main installed adjacent to the property. The applicant has preliminarily designed the sewer to flow out through the proposed Roseleaf Subdivision instead of flowing out to the existing trunk in Locust Grove. The applicant will be responsible to construct sewer mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordjnate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department.' Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 13. Domestic water service to this site shall be via main line extensions from mains installed adjacent to the property. The applicant will be responsible to construct water mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Applicant shall execute City of Meridian standard forms of easements, for any mains that are required to provide service. 14. Direct lot access to Locust Grove Road is prohibited. A note shall be placed on the final plat restricting access to Locust G~ove Road. 15. No variances, exceptions or reductions to the City adopted dimensional standards or uses are approved with this preliminary plat application. All minimum lot sizes, structure setbacks, street frontage, and house size requirements shall be maintained. 16. Maintenance of all common areas shall be the responsibility of the Chatsworth Homeowners' Association. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (PRELIMINARY PLAT) 1. All grading of the site shall be performed in conformance with MCC 11-12-3H. 2. Sidewalks shall be installed within the subdivision and on the perimeter of the subdivision pursuant to MCC 12-13-10-8. 3. Submit with the final plat application a copy of the Ada County Street Name Committee's approval letter for the subdivision name, and the lot and block numbering. Make any corrections necessary to conform. 4. A letter of credit or cash surety in the a.rr{ount of 110% will be required for all fencing, landscaping, pressurized irrigation, sanitary sewer, water, etc., prior to signature on the final plat. . 5. A detailed landscape and fencing plan, in compliance with the landscape and subdivision ordinance, shall be submitted for the subdivision with the final plat application. 6. Coordinate fIre hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 7. Two-hundred-fifty and one-hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after power designs are completed by Idaho Power Company. The street light contractor shall obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 8. Any tree over 4" in caliper that is removed from the property shall be replaced by installing additional trees, being the equivalent number of caliper inches of trees that were removed. Required landscaping trees will not be considered as replacement trees for those trees that have to be mitigated. 9. Submit any up-dated groundwater/soils monitoring data, as collected and analyzed by a soils scientist, to the Public Works Department for review. Any drainage areas (detention/retention basins) must be designed to ensure that water will percolate or discharge with a period oftime not"to exceed 24-hours for all storms up to and including a 100-year storm events. Side slopes within drainage areas shall not exceed 3: 1. Any portion of a drainage area not improved with sod/grass seed (or other approved landscaping) shall not count towards the required open space area. The project engineer should pay close attention to the results of field studies determining the groundwater, soil type & and characteristics during the design and construction phases. The engineer shall be required to certify that the street centerline elevations are set a minimum of 3-feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. This is to ensure that the bottom elevation of the crawl spaces of homes is at least I-foot above groundwater. 10. The applicant shall coordinate mailbox locations with the Meridian Post Office. 11. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 12. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all building pads receiving engineered backfill, where footing would sit atop fill material. 13. Applicant's engineer will be required to submit a signed, stamped statement certifying that all street finish centerline elevations are set a minimum of three feet above the highest established normal groundwater elevation. 14. The applicant shall be required to pay Public Works development plan review, and construction inspection fees, as determined during the plan review process, prior to signature on the fInal plat per Resolution 02-374. 15. All lot, parcel and tract sizes shall meet the mImmum dimensional standards as established in the zoning ordinance. 16. Staffs failure to cite specific ordinance provISIons or terms of the approved annexation/conditional use does not relieve the applicant of responsibility for compliance. 17. Preliminary plat approval shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 12-2-4. C. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall do one of the following regarding Locust Grove Road: a. Dedicate by donation a total of 35-feet from centerline (an additionallO-feet) of right-of-way along Locust Grove Road, and construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Locust Grove Road, located a minimum of 28-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way. b. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Locust Grove Road, located a minimum of28-feet from the centerline of the right-of-way, in an easement provided to the District. c. Do not dedicate additional right-of-way, but construct a minimum 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Locust Grove Road, located at the back edge of the existing right-of-way. Accomplish all necessary adjustments to properly accommodate existing drainage and utilities. 2. Construct all of the internal streets as 36-foot street sections within 50-feet of right- of- way with rolled curb, gutter, and 5-foot concrete sidewalks, as proposed. 3. Any landscape islands or medians shall be owned and maintained by the homeowner's association. Notes of this are required on the final plat. 4. Construct Claymont Street, the main entrance, to intersect Locust Grove Road approximately 285-feet south of the north property line (measured property line to centerline). 5. Construct Sartreano Avenue as a stub street connection to the north property line to connect to Roseleaf Subdivision. This roadway is located approximately 670-feet west of Locust Grove (measur~d centerline to centerline). 6. Construct S. Chatsworth Avenue to the south property line as a stub street to the 23-acre parcel. This street shall be located approximately 520-feet (measured centerline to centerline) east of the west property line. Install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating that, 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 7. Construct E. Pisa Street to the east property line as a stub street to the 4.99-acre parceL This street shall be located approximately 125-feet north of the south property line. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that; 'THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 8. Construct a stub street to the west property line. This street shall not be aligned with E. Tiber Drive. The stub street shall be located centrally between E. Tiber Drive and E. Pisa Street; intersecting with Bigham Avenue. Install a sign at the terminus of the stub street stating that, nTHIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." 9. Provide two traffic calming devices (chokers, stamped concrete pedestrian crossing, landscaped median; etc.) on E. Tiber Drive: one located at the intersection with S. Sartreano Avenue and one located at the intersection with S. Chatsworth Avenue OR provide a choker on E. Tiber Drive centrally located between S. Chats worth Avenue and S. Sartreano Avenue. The applicant shall coordinate the exact location and design with District Traffic Services Staff. 10. Other than the access that is specifically approved with this application, direct lot access to Locust Grove Road is prohibited and shall be noted on the final plat. 11. Comply with all Standard Conditions of ApprovaL Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 ~with fIle number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with fIle numbers) for details. . 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare arid certify all improvement plans. c 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #198, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of- way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. D. Adopt the Meridian Fire Department Recommendations as follows: 1. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 Ih" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. 2. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 3. Provide a 20' wide Fire Lane for all internal & external roadways. 4. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside. 5. The roads shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with a 33' street width shall have parking only on one side (portion of Tiber Drive. near Locust Grove Road). No Parking signs and red-painted curbs will be required. 6. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. 7. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. 8. A minimum of two points of access will be required for any portion of the proiect. which serves more than 50 homes. This shall be measured off of the center line of the street. The two entrances shall be separated by no less than Y2 the diagonal measurement of the project. 9. The proposed 77-10t subdivision with an estimated 2.9 residents per household would have a total estimated population of 223 residents at build out. 10. The proposed project lies outside the five-minute response zone goal. Achievement of this goal is subject to budgetary constraints and is intended to enhance the probability of a favorable outcome on a request for Basic Life Support. The budget constraints are typically defined as capital outlay for facilities that are located within 1.5 miles from a given location and sufficient operational funds to staff the facilities. 11. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer. 12. No Parking signs and painted curbs will be required for all Fire Lanes. No parking signs shall be installed on the 2 proposed common driveways. Coordinate the location of the required signage with the Meridlan Fire Department. E. Adopt the Recommendations of the Central District Health Department as follows: 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. F. Adopt the Recommendations ofNampa Meridian Irrigation District as follows: 1. The Preliminary Plat indicates that pressure irrigation will be supplied. If Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District is to own and operate the system a Land Use Change Application will be required. If the District is not to own and operate it than there will be no impact on the District by this proposed development and no further review is necessary . G. Adopt the Recommendations of the Sanitary Services Company as follows: 1. In accordance with MCC 4-1-11.B.4. the trash receptacles for Lots 3-6, and 12-15. Block 5 shall be located no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk for the adiacent street. SSC will not provide trash pick-up services utilizing the common driveway. The trash receptacle(s) shall not cause a nuisance and shall be enclosed. EXHffiIT E The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff: ANNEXA nON & ZONING ANALYSIS According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment. " The following is the list of standards found in 11-15-11 and analysis by staff: A. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment; Staff finds that the proposed zoning designation, R-8, is harmonious with and in accordance with the 2002 Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map, which designates the land to be Medium Density Residential. There is a minimum target density of three dwelling units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan; the proposed gross density of Chatsworth Subdivision is 3.97 dwelling units per acre. The Future Land Use Map shows a future community park in this square mile. However, the Parks Department is not seeking to acquire any land from the applicant. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; Staff does not anticipate that the applicant intends to rezone the subject property in the future. There are several large) undeveloped county parcels to the west and south of this land and additional annexation/rezone requests are anticipated on these parcels in the future. - C. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning -for example, a residential area turning into a commercial area by means of conditional use permits; Staff finds that the proposed single-family residential subdivision would be allowed within the requested zoning district of R-8. The accompanying plat demonstrates the land would be developed in lot sizes, housing types and other dimensional requirements that conform to the proposed zoning designation. D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new railroad access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area; Staff finds that the land directly north and east of the subject property is annexed and approved for development similar to the proposed subdivision (Roseleaf Subdivision and Tuscany Lakes Subdivision). Tuscany Village Subdivision and Sageland Subdivision were also recently approved residential developments in the area. Tuscany Lakes Subdivision is located near the southwest comer of Locust Grove Road and Victory Road and Sageland Subdivision is on the northeast comer of Locust Grove Road and Victory Road. The majority of Section 30, Township 3 North, Range 1 East is designated for residential.development similar to the proposed project. This is the third annexation application the City has processed within the northeast quarter of Section 30. Locust Grove Road is designated as a Section Line Road on the Functional Street Classification Map. This section of Locust Grove Road abutting the site is not currently programmed within ACHD's Five Year Work Program or Capital Improvement Program for roadway improvements. E. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; The existing character of the area will, and is, currently changing, especially upon build-out of the proposed project and other similar subdivisions in the general vicinity. Staff finds that the proposed R-8 zoning and subsequent single-family residential uses proposed in the preliminary plat are consistent with the intended character of the vicinity, as depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Staff also finds that the proposed zoning/uses can be designed and constructed in a manner that will be harmonious with and appropriate in appearance with the existing and intended character of the surrounding area. Although there will be an impact of the subject development on the existing character of the area (agricultural), staff finds that the impact is consistent with the intended character of the area; a mix of low and medium density residential. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony (oral and written) to determine whether or not the proposed zoning and subsequent uses will be disturbing or hazardous to the existing or future neighboring uses. Staff does not anticipate that the proposed residential uses will be hazardous as long as landscaping, fencing and the other conditions outlined in this report are complied with and construction traffic and house construction is conducted in a manner consistent with City Code. G. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services; Sanitary sewer and water to serve this development is currently available in Locust Grove Road, however, the applicant has preliminarily designed the sewer to flow out through the proposed Roseleaf Subdivision. The applicant shall be responsible for the extension of utilities to and through this proposed development. Sizing and routing shall be coordinated with the Public Works Department. The applicant and/or future property owners will be required to pay park and highway impact fees as well as construct on-site storm water drainage facilities. On August 11,2004, the ACHD Commission approved this development with site-specific and standard conditions. Please review the ACHD report for additional information regarding this finding. On July 23, 2004, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. A concern about secondary emergency access to this site has been raised by the Meridian Fire Department. See Site Specific Condition # 9 in the Preliminary Plat section of this report, and the detailed comments and conditions from agencies attending the comments meeting at the end of this report. Staff finds that the public services listed above can be made available to accommodate the proposed development. The Commission and Council should reference any written and/or verbal testimony submitted by the Meridian Police and Fire Departments, or any other public service provider, regarding their ability to adequately service this project. NOTE: Sanitary Service Company (SSC) will not enter privately owned common driveways in residential subdivisions to pick-up trash. MCC 4-1-11.B.4 requires all trash cans "be placed as close to the curb as possible, or in alleys if the property has alley access. The solid waste containers shall be clear of pedestrian and vehicular traffic at all times. Solid waste containers shall be clearly visible and accessible to the waste collection personnel and free from obstructions including, but not limited to, trees, shrubbery, fences, vehicles, and walls." The impact of this ordinance on Lots 12-15, and Lots 3-6" Block 5, is that property owners will have to haul their trash cans from the residence to the public street. SSC is requesting a condition that all trash cans for Lots 3-6, and 12-15, Block 5, be placed no more than five (5) feet behind the sidewalk off the adjacent public street. (See Preliminary Plat Site Specific Condition #11) H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; If approved, the developer will be financing the extension of sewer, water, local street infrastructure, utilities and irrigation services to serve the project. The primary public costs to serve the future residents will be fire, police and school facilities and services. Staff finds there will not be excessive additional requirements at public cost and that the rezone will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. I. Will .the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff finds that the proposed annexation and the development of single-family homes on this site will not involve uses that will create nuisances that would be detrimental to the general welfare of the surrounding area. ACHD projects this development will generate 760 additional vehicle trips per day. Staff recognizes the fact that traffic and noise will increase with the approval of this subdivision; however, staff does not believe that the amount generated will be detrimental to the general welfare of the public. Staff does not anticipate the proposed annexation and subsequent uses will create excessive traffic, nOIse, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. J. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; The location of the proposed new entry road, Tiber Drive, has been approved by ACHD. Tiber Drive is located approximately 285-feet from the Tuscany Lakes Subdivision entry road (Palermo Drive) on the east side of Locust Grove Road. Further, the applicant is proposing to extend a stub street. from Roseleaf Subdivision to provide access to the site, limiting the amount of interference with traffic on surrounding classified streets. If the two proposed vehicular approaches are constructed as approved by ACHD, staff does not believe that the subdivision will create interference with traffic on the surrounding public streets. Please review the ACHD report for this project for additional information regarding this finding. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and Staff finds that no natural or scenic features of major importance will be lost or damaged by approving the annexation and rezone. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592, 11-17-1992)? Staff finds that all essential services are available or will be provided by the developer to the subject property and will not require unreasonable expenditure of public funds. The applicant is proposing to develop the land in substantial compliance with the City's comprehensive plan (medium density residential). The land east and north of the subject property has already been annexed and this is a logical expansion of existing zoning and land uses. In accordance with the findings listed above, staff finds that the annexation/rezone of this property would be in the best interest of the City. ( / I, EXHffiIT F The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff: PRELIMINARY PLAT FINDINGS AND REQUIREMENTS Sections 12-3-3 J.2 and 12-3-5 D read as follows: "In determining the acceptance ofa proposed subdivision, the Commission/Council shall consider the objectives of this title and at least the following: A. The conformance of the subdivision with the Comprehensive Development Plan; Staff finds that the proposed application is in substantial compliance with the adopted Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan (Chapter VII). The proposed denSIty, 3.97 dwelling units per acre (gross), is in compliance with the land use classification, medium density residential, noted on the map. B. The availability of public services to accommodate the proposed development; Staff finds that public services are available to accommodate the proposed development. (See finding "G" under Annexation and Zoning Analysis for more detail. ) C. The continuity of the proposed development with the capital improvement program; Because the developer is installing sewer, water, and utilities for the development at their cost, staff finds that the subdivision will not require the expenditure of capital improvement funds. D. The public rmancial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; Staff recommends the Commission and Council rely upon comments from the public service providers (i.e. police, fire, ACHD, etc) to determine this finding. (See finding "G" under Annexation and Zoning Analysis above, and the Agency Comments and Conditions at the end of this report for more detail.) E. The other health, safety or environmental problems that may be brought to the Commission's attention. Staff is not aware of any health, safety or environmental problems associated with the development of this subdivision that should be brought to the Councilor Commission's attention. ACHD considers road safety issues in their analysis; ACHD staffhas approved this subdivision, with conditions. Staff recommends that the Commission and Council reference any public testimony that may be presented to determine whether or not the proposed subdivision may cause health, safety or environmental problems of which staff is unaware. October 1 , 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Larry Knopp RZ 04-008 October 5,2004 ITEM NO. 5~C REQUEST Findings - Request for a Rezone of .23 acres from R-8 to O-T zones for Larry Knopp- 713 North Meridian Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: J JJ..J(r"l/ ~ ' Date: 10-'5 m. p~",ne:~ Emailed: ~==..J<rlOPP@ RJe~'" (301-S.e . ('frY) Staff Initials: _'Jfj: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. See attached Findings ~,rV SEP 3 0 2004 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF I. DECISION & ORDER City Of Mendian '"' . tV ("' 1 J ('~ ffi \~'lY, \::'1" <:: .J 'lee In the Matter of a Request for Rezone of 0.23 ACI'es from R-8 to 0- T Zoning and a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in the proposed 0- T zone for Larry Knopp-713 N. Meridian Road. Case No(s). RZ-04-008, CUP-04-019 For the City Council Hearing Date of: September 14, 2004 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code 967- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the September 14,2004 public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Those that testified at the public hearing included: 1. In favor - Larry Knopp 11. In opposition - none 111. Commenting - none IV. Staff - Anna Canning c. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code 967-6509,6512, and Meridian City Code S9 11-15-5 and 11-17-5. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ('A~F N()(~\ R7_04_00R rTTP_04_OlQ _ PA(;F 1 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner( s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is Idaho Trust Services as Trustee of the 713 Meridian Road Investment Trust. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits D and E for the findings required for each application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (Ie. 967- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6,2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3" The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code 9 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Site /Landscape Plan dated September 9,2004 as shown in Exhibit B and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit C. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval ofthe application. e. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: CITY OF MERIDIAN FlNDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ('A~F N()(~) RZ.04.00l< rTTP_04_0l Q _ PAGF ? 1. The applicant's CUP Site/Landscape Plan dated September 9, 2004 IS hereby conditionally approved; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code 9 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved SitelLandscape Plan Exhibit C: Conditions of Approval Exhibit D: Rezone Findings Exhibit E: Conditional Use Permit Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ,2004. day of CITY OF MERIDIANFINDlNGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER rA~"R N()(~) R7_04_00R rTTP-04-01 Q _ PAG"R 1. COUNCILMAN SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ COUNClLMAN BILL .l"1AA ~ - ~ COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED~ VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED -- e Weerd Attest: ~ a g ~ 00. "Qi 0 $ --:;',1"6 :S, 16\ . ..{'.$ '/. "'I '!?' " Copy served upon Applicant, The P]ati'~l)g~J14\~~niltlt:Dipartment, Public Works Department ;~,,//;-_.; ;;, ';-::li\\\~,'~"\~ and City Attorney. By: --Jol.lL, ~lQ 11 rvJ City Clerk Dated: 10--18-(}4 CITY OF J\1.ERIDIANFINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ('A~F N()(~\ 'R7-04_flOR rTTP_0.<1_01 Q _ PA(}1:;.<1 EXHIBIT A See Attached Deed and Legal Description ,..--... -~ <(5 i< r i ! z r ., ~ECU\D-;;;lVlt) NAVAMO "g~DAHO DIlOI/03 ot~ '''' taauil "'t\\~~~f 1\\ \'1\1U\'\'\\"\1"~\"\1" \ 1\1 R~~DEO-ft~~y U:I 1031332S1 ntlt onl AMCUM\' un --~ ;. - ~" WiiEN ReCORDED MAIL 10: LANCE D. CHURCHILL 961 PARKCENTER BLVD #31 J BOISE JO 82706 fiAcxn..(P Space Above This Line For Re(!QTder's Use Loan No. 0432264828 Parcel No.; RD406020010 T.S. No 1049173..09 TRUSTEE'S DEED FlOELITY NATIONAL TIlLE INS COMPANY, (herein called Trustee) Il;S TRUSTEE under the Daed ofTruSt hereinafter panicularly described, does hereby BARGAIN, SELL AND CONVEY, WITHOUT WARRANTY. TO IDAHO TRUST SERVICES AS TRUSTEE OF THE 713 MERIDIAN ROAD INVESTMENT TRUST (he~in called GRANTEE) whose llddress is: 961 PARKCENTER BLVD #311 BOlSE 1D 81706 all of the real property siruated in the County of ADA, Stll.te of Idaho described as follows; LOT 4 IN BLOCK" OF J.M. ANDERSON HOME PLAT. ACCORDING TO 'J:'Ii:E OFFICiAL 'fLAT 'I.'HEltEOF. FILED IN BOOK 8 Oll' PLATS AT PAGE 348. RECORDS OE, ADA COUNTY. IDAHO. ~ .~.: This conveyance is Iliad.: pursuant to the powers. conferred upon Trustee by Deed of trust between JOHN R. BEAUDOJliAND MAltGARET JUDY BEAUDOIN, ffiJSJ3AND AND WIFE '~:' . as Grantor, STEWART TITI..E, lU trustne and NORTH AMERICAN MORTGAGE COMPANY as Bt;neficiBlY, recorded July 31, 2000, a~ Instrument No. 100060317 in ADA county, Idaho Mongagc Records, IInd afi~r the fulfiJlmcnt of the conditions specified in said Deed ofTru!lt authorizing this conveyance as follows: (a) Default occured in the obli~tionr. for which such Deed of Trust WlU giveR 11.6 security and The Bencriiciary made demilnd upon the said Trustee to .lioll said propeny pun;uant to the lerms OfSllid Deed of Trun. Notice of Default was recorded as InstTumentNo. 102153292 (b) After recordation of said Notice ofDefauh, Trustee gave notice of the time and place of the sale or "id property by regiitenld or certi~ed mail, by personal service upon th~ occupants of said real property, by posting in a conspicoou!l place on >aid propeny and by publi,shi,1'It in a news.paper of general circulation in each of the counties in whicn tho proporty is situated IS more fully appears in affidavits recorded at least 20 days prior to date of sale 8S Instrument No. (s): affidll\'it of mailings 103033181 affidllVit or posting and servicc 103033 J 83 affidavit of publishing 103033182 recorded in ADA County, Idaho Mortgllj;C records. THIS DOCUMENT IS FRED FOR RECORD BY FIDElITY NATIONAL TITLE INS. CO. AS .AN ACCOMODA1ION ONLY IT HAS NOT BEEN Ef.AMrNED AS TO ITS EXECUTlO!'; OR AS TO ITS EFFEct UPON TH[ TITLE ---- " . , ;. ~ Loan No. 04n264R2& T.S. No 1049173.09 Parcel No.: R0406020020 TRUSTEE'S DEED, Continued (c) The provisions, recitals and contentS ofthe Notice of Default referred to in paragraph (a) supra and of the Affidavils n:fem::d 10 in paragraph (b) lIupra shall be and they are hereby incorporated her~n and made an integral part bereoffor all pu:rposes 311lhou8h set folth herein at leflgth. . (d) AI1l'Cqui~ments lJflaw regarding the mailing. pen:OJ1IlI service, posting, publication and recording of Notice of DClfault, and notice of sale Ilnd of all other notices have been complied with. (e) Not less than 120 days elpased between the giving of notice "fsale by registelred or ceJ'tifed mnil and the sale of said property. (f) Tnntce. atthe time IInd plllce ofsaJe fixed by said notice, at public auction, in one parcel, strock offw the Onmtec, being the highelit bidder therefor, the property herein described,. fo(' the xum of $52,(1) LOO, subjeet however to ll\l P06! liens a.nd encumbrances. No person Or corporation offered to take any part of Jiaid property less than the whole thereof for the amounl of principal, interest. advance!., and costs. Dated: August 6, 2003 ~ ~~~~;:Of ~;aiJ~ On a ( 7 / tJ ?J befo re me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in . ~ and for SlUG state, personally appeared G.rri ShGDDatd pcrsonlllly Jc:nown to me (or proved to m~ on the basis of satisfactory evidence) tl) be the person(s) whose narne(s) is/are subscribed tt> the within instrument and aeknowledscd to me that he/she! thr:y executed the same in hislhclhh~ir lluthorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signa.ture(s) on tbe insrrumcnt the pcrson(s), or entity upon bohalf of which the person(s.) acted, executed rhe instrument. WITNESS my hand and official Real. Sir~rIFltUrej1;..vnf(/ A/~ PAGE 2 OF 2 " CMMfIADQI.ICW,f _ Comr:n.tpIon If 11169&' :$. NCIDIy fId!lIc . CClllfomla l' 0rtrIglI County - j _ ~ ~ ~~~~1~~7f rDUSJD RtN. 10/16199 EXHmIT B See Attached Site/Landscape Plan -""7nJ.: ?'... S:fj- ,;;> ,~ ~; j -ii: it '" -?I ~ ~ ft .~ ';. FJ:n ~ "'~ :~ '" "'\.7J ~> ~ ~ '" it! !> I ! Z: " ~~~r- ~ :_~ ~ ., ~ a; t! l{; ~ fA .'tit (:"1 ;J:; ~ , b C r I")' 'l! ~t;- ~:?--r i f d ~~.fi J !:4fh i "n n ?if ~;!i r ~n H;-i if;fH i;: ':0 ""...1 .l~ fZ;' ~i "~i'l ~ ~ ~l [ l f ~ i~!. n t : : ~: ~ . R ~ ~ ~ 1_ - .~.'~;;;: ; .~g~'" "n "'" vi'~ ~lt"lI l' "'3 .r ~ rt !'I, ~..'I,t ~k~ ibi ~ i.. ~ .-' ~ -~ ; ~ft~ ~f.:~! ~tt m ; a -r ~ , ! ~:;!t~ t.< "j ll" ~,~~, '::"'R ~~, ~~~2'Z~ l! ->1"'.1 ~~'.;; '*"'" fg;' ~..J.~-i1'-" ~. it\:!~. ~ if f '{ ~ WJ ~ ~... ~~'l-!::'r "J}, .s!I. # :1 ~: ;1}'1 'lll~,", l$.;tii ~.~ &l< '~"~ ~j.~ ~~'I: Ji:, '! ~ "I ;$I" " .::~ fi - If REMODEL for IDAHO lRUSl SERVICES " >1~ro1 )JI2 !CPill II(fltll"" ~ ~~ ~C.MI EXHIBIT C The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the requested Conditional Use Permit as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: Planning & Zoning / Public Works 1. The building and site improvements shall be constructed per the approved plans with all modifications required by this report. 2. The project is approved for office or other commercial use, provided parking requirements can be met. 3. The applicant shall revise the plan to correct the right-of-way/property line location and project layout, show the stormwater facilities, show the trash enclosure, correct the tree species, and make any other changes required by the Commission. Submit 10 copies of the revised plan to the City Clerk's office at least 10 days prior to the next hearing on this application. 4. No freestanding signs approved for this project. Any wall signs shall be regulated by the L-O standards for signage in the zoning ordinance. 5. The buffers between land uses, street buffers are approved per the dimensions shown on the approved site/landscape plan (with the modified building setback). Pine trees shall be changed to an approved deciduous species. 6. This conditional use permit shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MeC 11-17-4.B. 7. All 90-degree parking stalls shall be at least 9 feet wide and 19 feet deep per Ordinance 11-13-4.F. All drive aisles adjacent to parking shall be at least 25 feet wide. 8. The existing trees proposed for removal may be removed without mitigation. 9. All parking and drive aisles shall be paved for all uses, in compliance with the submitted plans. Handicap parking spaces shall be signed and striped in compliance with Federal accessibility guidelines. I O. 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. 11. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in this report and Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall require separate sign permit( s). 12. All construction and site improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the adopted building and fire codes. 13. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer COrd. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. Storm water treatment and disposal must be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection Wells. 14. 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. Fire Department Conditions 1. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. 2. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 lh" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers. f Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. 3. Building setbacks shall be per the Building Code for one and two story construction: 4. Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of300' apart. 5. Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 6. Provide a Knoxbox entry system for the complex. 7. The first digit of the Apartment/Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 8. Please contact the Fire Marshal at 888-1234 to work specific issues associated with this project. Sanitary Services Comment: 1. Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal prior to the public hearing. There is a concern that the required modifications may significantly impact your site design and may require a revised site plan. If the site plan is revised, contact the planner assigned to the project immediately to discuss the changes and how to proceed with the revised site plan. Police Department Comment: 1. The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application. Parks Department Comment: 1. The Parks Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. B. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: 1. Meridian Road Dedicate additional 5-feet of right-of-way for a total of 35-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Meridian Road abutting the parcel by means of a warranty deed. The right- of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACHD Commission or 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 be paid the fair market value of the right-of-way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACHD right-of-way if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with the ACHD Ordinance in effect at that time (currently Ordinance #198), iffunds are available. 2. Alley Dedicate 2-feet of additional right-of-way from the centerline of the north/south alley to provide lO-feet from centerline 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 the alley is to be brought to adopted standards by the developers of abutting properties. 3. Pave the alley its entire width of the right-of-way from the nearest public street to and abutting the development. 4. Construct the alley approach as proposed, 24-feet north of the south property line. This location meets District policy and shall be approved as proposed. 5. Pave the alley approach 25-feet in width and 30-feet into the site. Delineate the driveway with landscaping as proposed. 6. Provide on site parking with adequate turning radius to prevent backing out into the alley. 7. The applicant shall be required to repair any existing damaged sidewalk; curb and gutter construction or replacement; replacement of unused driveways with standard curb, gutter and sidewalk; installation of pedestrian ramps; pavement repairs; signs; traffic control devises; and other similar items in order to correct deficiencies or replace deteriorated facilities. The applicant shall be required to work with the Development staff to correct any deficiencies abutting the site. 8. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State ofIdaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #198, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of- way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. C. Adopt the Recommendations of the Central District Health Department as follows: 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. D. Adopt the Recommendations of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District as follows: 1. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. 2. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 3. The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. 4. NMID recommends that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. EXHIBIT D The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff, with strikethrough l1lodffications, as noted. STANDARDS FOR ZONING AMENDMENT The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the follawing standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment (11- 15-11): A. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive plan amendment; Staff finds that the requested Old Town (O-T) zoning designation is in accord with the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map, which delineates the subject property as "Old-Town" _ The text of the Comprehensive Plan (page 99) supports a variety of uses in the 0- T zone, including offices and retail. In addition, it states, "In order to provide and accommodate preservation of the historical character, specific design requirements may be imposed. Pedestrian amenities would be emphasized." B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be re-zoned in the future; Staff finds that the proposed re-zone and accompanying development plans comply with the requested zone and staff does not anticipate that the property will be rezoned in the future. C. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning; Staff finds that the applicant has submitted detailed development plans for a Conditional Use Permit for the property. Staff further finds that the proposed office/retail use will only be allowed with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit in the proposed 0- T zone. Intended setbacks ',..ill be defined by thc Downtown Transportation !\fanagcment Plan; until the plan is complete and adoptod, setbacks should be in alignment other structures on the block. D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned; Staff finds that the City's Comprehensive Plan has provided the applicant with the ability to request the O-T zone for the subject property. Much of Meridian Road has already redeveloped from residential to office or commercial uses. E. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; Staff finds that the proposed development is designed in a manner that will be harmonious with and appropriate in appearance with the existing neighborhood, especially if setbacks are modified in alignmcnt ....rith other existing structures along the block. The proposed office/commercial use in harmony with the intended uses in Old Town. Staff is pleased that the applicant has placed the parking in the rear of the building. F. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; Staff finds that the requested rezone should not be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. Through the comp plan process, the City determined that compact, infill development is appropriate for the area. Any future change of use on the property that may have a significant impact on the surrounding properties will require conditional use approval under current ordinances, and adjoining property owners will have an opportunity to comment. Staff anticipates that the proposed office/retail building use will not be hazardous or disturbing to the neighboring uses. The Commission and Council should consider all public testimony, oral and writte~ before making this finding. G. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such service; Staff finds that the proposed uses can be adequately served by all essential public services and facilities. Drainage will need to be retained on site. Please show the proposed drainage facilities on the plans to be revised and resubmitted. H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public faciJities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Staff finds that the requested uses will not create excessive additional requirements at public costs for public facilities and services. Additionally, staff finds that the proposed rezone would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. I. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, matel;aIs, equipment, and conditions that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff finds that the proposed 0- T zoning designation of the property does not inherently allow uses that will generate activities, processes, materials, equipment, and conditions that are detrimental to the general welfare of the community. J. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which shaD be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding pu blic streets; Staff finds that the proposed 0- T zoning will not interfere with general traffic patterns on any public streets. Please refer to the revised ACED staff report for a full report on traffic issues. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. Staff finds that the existing trees on the site are considered dead or dying and may be removed without mitigation. No other natural or scenic features will be lost or damaged by the project. L. Is the pmposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City; Staff finds that the proposed rezone would be in the best interest of the City by allowing a property owner to make improvements to the property for re- development that would otherwise not be allowed without the rezone. EXHIBIT E The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; The proposed building is 2,674 s.f total. Ordinance requires 1 per 400 s.f for professional office and 1 off-street parking space per 200 s.f for retail uses. Thus, for an office use, the project would require 7 spaces. 7 spaces are provided per the site plan. For a retail use, however, the project would require 13 spaces. Staff finds that the subject property, as depicted, is large enough to accommodate the required parking, open spaces and landscaping required by the ordinance for an office use, as long the buffers between land uses are approved under alternative compliance. The site does not have enough space to accommodate parking for a retail use. Therefore staff recommends approval of the project for office or other commercial use provided that parking requirements are met. See condition #2 below. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as Old Town. Staff finds that jfthe modifications required in this report are done, the application will meet the requirements of the Planned Development and other Zoning Ordinances. See items A and C under the Zoning Amendment Analysis. c. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Staff finds the design concept to be compatible with the intended character of the area. See item E under the Zoning Amendment Analysis. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Staff does not anticipate that the proposed development will have an adverse impact on the surrounding property. However, the Commission and Council should consider any testimony given at the public hearings before making this finding. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item G. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item H. G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item I. H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item 1. 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. See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item K. October 1 , 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Larry Knopp CUP 04-019 October 5,2004 ITEM NO. 5-D REQUEST Findings - Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in an existing building in the proposed O-T zone for Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATIORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Findings fJ1f'O .r/ I~ . , . C !(l1Q12P Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Date: -l ().rC) Staff Initials: Phone: lIW1 Contacted: Emaited: CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for Rezone of 0.23 Acres from R-8 to 0- T Zoning and a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in the proposed 0- T zone for Larry Knopp-713 N. Meridian Road. Case No(s). RZ-04-008, CUP-04-019 For the City Council Hearing Date of: September 14, 2004 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the September 14, 2004 public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Those that testified at the public hearing included: 1. In favor - Larry Knopp 11. In opposition - none 111. Commenting - none lV. Staff - Anna Canning c. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 and 11-17-5. CITY OF :MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER (,A~P Nn(~) "R7_04_00R f'TJP_04_01 Q _ PArm 1 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance of these findings is Idaho Trust Services as Trustee of the 713 Meridian Road Investment Trust. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibits D and E for the findings required for each application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (Ie. ~67- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan ofthe City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6,2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A, the Site /Landscape Plan dated September 9,2004 as shown in Exhibit B and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit C. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code S 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER ('A~F Nn(~) R7 J)4-on~ (,TTP-04-0l Q _ PAn-I<" ? 1. The applicant's CUP SitelLandscape Plan dated September 9, 2004 IS hereby conditionally approved; and 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C. D, Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context <<structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved SitelLandscape Plan Exhibit C: Conditions of Approval Exhibit D: Rezone Findings Exhibit E: Conditional Use Permit Findings By ~ of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ Io~r-, 2004. Lrb- t./ . day of CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER rASl' NOrS) R7.04_00R rTTP-04_OlQ _ PAOl', COUNCILMAN SHAUN WARDLE VOTED ~ SOT JNCfE:;MAt\j .I:HLL .N Ai{ Y vOTED COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED ~ VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) - VOTED Attest: and City Attorney. By:,lOJLQ ;lJf\ G Q N0 city Clerk Dated: iO...U? -M CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER r'A~F Nn(~) R7_04-flOR r'TTP_04.01 Q _ PAC1F 4 EXHIBIT A See Attached Deed and Legal Description ,------. ~~5. " r io. ~.,.. 7. j- --- ., ...-- ~~9eR J, DA.VID NAVARRO ~OA CO He BtlUI03 04'~ PM ~~~~ tltl\~!~~; 11\\ \"~'ml\I\'\l\\,,,q\,,\\\,\' 1\\ ftEOftDfO-Rwy 1 le31332~7 nUl Ollt AMOUll1' &Jill WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: LANCE D. CHURCHILL 96] PARKCENTER BL VO #311 BOISE ID 82706 riAC02.Lo Loan No. 0432264828 T.S. No W49173-Q9 Pared No.: R0406020020 Splice Above Thi5 Line For Recorder's Use TRUSTEE'S DEED FiDELITY NATiONAL TITLE INS COMPANY. (herein cllJled Trustee) itS TRUSTEE under the Doed of Trus-t hereinafter particularly described. does h~eby BARGAIN, SELL ANn CONVEY, WITHOUT WARRANTY, TO IDAHO TRUST SERVICES AS TRUSTEE OF THE 713 MERIDIAN ROAD INVESTMENT TRUST (herein called GRANTEE) whose llddress is: 961 P ARKCENTER BLVD "3 II BOlSE ID 82706 all 0 f the real property situated in the County of ADA, Stllte of ldaho described as fo !lows: LOT 4 IN BLOCK 4 OF J.M. ANDERSON gOME PLAT. ACCORDING TO THE OFFIC~At. PLAT 'I.'HER.il:OF. FILED IN BOOK B DE' PLATS AT PAGE 348. RECORDS oF: ADA COUNTY. IDAHO. ~ This conveyance is niade pUrSuflnt to the powe~ canferred upon Trustee by Deed of irust be:tWeen JOHN R.. BEAUOOJl'!!;AND MARGARET roDY BEAUDOIN, HUS:BAND AND WIFE. :f;:' . as Grantor, STEWART TITLE, as trustae and NORTH AMERICAN MORTGAGE COMPANY as Beneficiai)'. recorded July 31,2000, as Insuument No. 100060317 in ADA county. ldallo Mongage R~ordg, and after the fulfillment oftbc conditions specified in said Deed of Trust aUlhQri'ling mi~ conveyance as fonows: (a) Defawt oecured in the oblieationti for which such Deed of Trust was gi....en as security lIod the Bendleiary made dem~nd upon the !Aid Trustee to IiClII .Gllid propcny pufliuant to the lenn3 of said Deed of Trolt. NOtice ofOefauh wasrecorded as Inf>tTUment No. 102153292 (b) After recordation of Sl1id Notice (If Default, Trustee gave notice of the time and place of the sa t e o( ni d property by regiitered or certified mail. by personal service upon the occllpants of said felll property, by posting in a c'onspicuou5 place on said property and by publishing in a newspaper of gene",1 circulation in each of the counties in which IJ1c property is ail.uated as more fully appears in affidavit6 recotdod III least 20 days prior to date of sale as Irlslrumont No. (s): ll.ffidllVit of mailings t 03033181 IlffidBvir of posuns and service 103033183 affidavit of publishing 1030:)) 182 r~ord~ in ADA County, Id~hQ Mprtgllge records. THIS DOCUMENT IS FILED FOR RECORD BY FIDElITY NATIONAL TITLE INS. CO. AS AN ACCOMODATlON ONLY IT HAS NOT BEEN EYJlMINED AS TO ITS EXECUTIO~'; OR AS TO ITS EFFECT UPON THE TITLE - " ,,---... . ''';' . I ;, ... Loan No. 04)2264828 T.S. No 1049173-09 Parcel No.: R.0406020020 TRUSTEE"S DEED, Continued (c) The provisions, recitato and contents ofthe Notice of Default referred to in paragl1l.ph (a) supra and of the Affidavits rcferrt:a to in parll8T'Ph (b) llupTa shall be and they are hereby ineorporated herein and made an integral part hereof for al1 pU1'PO$e~ all thou~h set forth herein at length. . (d) All requirements of law regarding the mlliling, pen:Mol sel"\'ice. posting. publication and TeC01'dlng of Notice of Default, and notice of $JIll: llnd ofall other notices have been complied with. (e) Not less tban 120 days elpased between the giving of notice of sale by registered or certifed mail and the sale of said property. (f) Trustee, at the time and place of sale fixed by said notice, 8t public auction. in one parcel, strock offw the Grantee, being the highcs;t bidder therefor, tbe property herein des.cribed, for the sum of $52;001.00, subject however to all prior liens and encumbrances. No person Or corporation offered tl> take any put of said property less than the whole thereof for the amounl of principal, ineerest, advances, and costs. Dated: August 6, 2003 ~ State of C~ County of ~ "'" ~ all ~ {11 () ? before me, the undersigned. a Notary Public in and for sa:d stllte. personally appeared Glfti ShGDoard personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to bc the peT1on(s) whose name(s) i8lare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she! they executed the same in hislher/thcir lIuthorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/tbeir signature(s) on the insrrument the person(s), or entity UJlon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand Bnd official seaL Si'Jflatu~~/~~~) @ CARMflADAlll~ _ Commkllonlll 1&169&1 $.. NcIaIV fI'IeIb . CalItomIa ~ 0ItInge County - j ~ ~ _ ~~~~1~~71 PAGE:2 OF 2 rDUSJD ReoI. I (J/16199 EXHIBIT B See Attached Site./l,andscape Plan ~ "J "(4 -0 c"l l ~ ",~ ft ~ l.' ;; i , ~ Jl m t ;5! ;; ~ ;J t; ~ jJ ;? '$ c~ ~ C r- 1"'/ ~ iI!!Ji ~ ;iiiH , ""c r~ ?~t?~~r ~!~ Hil iff~ft;~ ~. .:~ ~ .:l~ f I~ ~,," ':il ~ ~c "'i'::J J ~ J " .. rr $'1.1 ~:t 1.- ~, f : ; ~ a b 8 'l, 'l. '" I ~ i:~;;~ ;; :!l:'il!~ "" .....~i.::\ ..:Ill: ~ ~"3 ... JUt, ~'l, .....'l,~ ~ } ~fi ~ ~"'.c ~ ....... 1\0 '" " .... .~,.,. I :'I: ' ~ .~ ~-'" 'I;"'~ '1 , ! ~ ~ 2;- ~ ~ " j ~~";~; '" <! - ~- '" .~ ~ 1i''''' ~:: : I 1 I J REMODtL for IDAHO TRllSl SERVI.GES "'.n~~!I('''Q1''''fI>>CI: ~. ~aMf -R EXHmIT C The City Council ofthe City of Meridian hereby approves the requested Conditional Use Permit as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: Planning & Zoning / Public Works 1. The building and site improvements shall be constructed per the approved plans with all modifications required by this report. 2. The project is approved for office or other commercial use, provided parking requirements can be met. 3. The applicant shall revise the plan to correct the right-of-way/property line location and project layout, show the stormwater facilities, show the trash enclosure, correct the tree species, and make any other changes required by the Commission. Submit 10 copies of the revised plan to the City Clerk's office at least 10 days prior to the next hearing on this application. 4. No freestanding signs approved for this project. Any wall signs shall be regulated by the L-O standards for signage in the zoning ordinance. 5. The buffers between land uses, street buffers are approved per the dimensions shown on the approved site/landscape plan (with the modified building setback). Pine trees shall be changed to an approved deciduous species. 6. This conditional use permit shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 11-17-4.B. 7. All 90-degree parking stalls shall be at least 9 feet wide and 19 feet deep per Ordinance ll-13-4.F. All drive aisles adjacent to parking shall be at least 25 feet wide. 8. The existing trees proposed for removal may be removed without mitigation. 9. All parking and drive aisles shall be paved for all uses, in compliance with the submitted plans. Handicap parking spaces shall be signed and striped in compliance with Federal accessibility guidelines. 10. 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. 11. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in this report and Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall require separate sign permit( s). 12. All construction and site improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the adopted building and fire codes. 13. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. Storm water treatment and disposal must be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction which has authority over the receiving stream provides written authorization prior to development plan approval. The applicant is responsible for filing all necessary applications with the Idaho Department of Water Resources regarding Shallow Injection Wells. ]4. 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% ofthe cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid must accompany any request for temporary occupancy. Fire Department Conditions 1. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. 2. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 1/2" outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on corners. f Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. 3. Building setbacks shall be per the Building Code for one and two story construction. 4. Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of300' apart. 5. Maintain a separation of 5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 6. Provide a Knoxbox entry system for the complex. 7. The first digit of the Apartment/Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 8. Please contact the Fire Marshal at 888-1234 to work specific issues associated with this project. Sanitary Services Comment: 1. Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal prior to the public hearing. There is a concern that the required modifications may significantly impact your site design and may require a revised site plan. If the site plan is revised, contact the planner assigned to the project immediately to discuss the changes and how to proceed with the revised site plan. Police Department Comment: 1. The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application. Parks Department Comment: 1. The Parks Department has no concerns with the site design as submitted with the application. B. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: 1. Meridian Road Dedicate additional 5-feet of right-of-way for a total of 35-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Meridian Road abutting the parcel by means of a warranty deed. The right- of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to scheduling the final plat for signature by the ACHD Commission or 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 be paid the fair market value of the right-of-way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACHD right-of-way if the owner submits a letter of application to the impact fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with the ACHD Ordinance in effect at that time (currently Ordinance #198), iffunds are available. 2. Alley Dedicate 2-feet of additional right-of-way from the centerline of the north/south alley to provide lO-feet from centerline 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 the alley is to be brought to adopted standards by the developers of abutting properties. 3. Pave the alley its entire width of the right-of-way from the nearest public street to and abutting the development. 4. Construct the alley approach as proposed, 24-feet north of the south property line. This location meets District policy and shall be approved as proposed. 5. Pave the alley approach 25-feet in width and 30-feet into the site. Delineate the driveway with landscaping as proposed. 6. Provide on site parking with adequate turning radius to prevent backing out into the alley. 7. The applicant shall be required to repair any existing damaged sidewalk; curb and gutter construction or replacement; replacement of unused driveways with standard curb, gutter and sidewalk; installation of pedestrian ramps; pavement repairs; signs; traffic control devises; and other similar items in order to correct deficiencies or replace deteriorated facilities. The applicant shall be required to work with the Development staff to correct any deficiencies abutting the site. 8. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the right-of-way. 2. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 3. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 4. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 5. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State ofIdaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 6. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit (or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes. 7. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 8. Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building construction in accordance with Ordinance #l98, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 9. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of- way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 10. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District. 11. Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans, or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. C. Adopt the Recommendations of the Central District Health Department as follows: 1. This proposal can be approved for central sewage & central water after written approval from appropriate entities is submitted. 2. The Applicant's central sewage and central water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 3. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 4. Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. 5. The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. D. Adopt the Recommendations of the Nampa Meridian lnigation District as follows: 1. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. 2. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 3. The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. 4. NMID recommends that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. EXHIBIT D The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff, with strikethrough modifications, as noted. STANDARDS FOR ZONING AMENDMENT The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment (11- 15-11): A. Will the new zoning be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive plan amendment; Staff finds that the requested Old Town (0- T) zoning designation is in accord with the Comprehensive Plan's Future Land Use Map, which delineates the subject property as "Old-Town". The text of the Comprehensive Plan (page 99) supports a variety of uses in the 0- T zone, including offices and retail. In addition, it states, "In order to provide and accommodate preservation of the historical character, specific design requirements may be imposed. Pedestrian amenities would be emphasized." B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be re~zoned in the future; Staff finds that the proposed re-zone and accompanying development plans comply with the requested zone and staff does not anticipate that the property will be rezoned in the future. C. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning; Staff finds that the applicant has submitted detailed development plans for a Conditional Use Permit for the property. Staff further finds that the proposed office/retail use will only be allowed with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit in the proposed 0- T zone. Intended sctbacks '.,<ill be defined by thc Do..,mtown Transportation Managcmcnt Plan; until the plan is complete and adopted, setbacks should bc in alignment other structures on thc block. D. Has the.'e been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned; Staff finds that the City's Comprehensive Plan has provided the applicant with the ability to request the 0- T zone for the subject property. Much of Meridian Road has already redeveloped from residential to office or commercial uses. E. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; Staff finds that the proposed development is designed in a manner that will be harmonious with and appropriate in appearance with the existing neighborhood, especially if setbacks arc modified in alignment with other existing structures along the block The proposed office/commercial use in harmony with the intended uses in Old Town. Staff is pleased that the applicant has placed the parking in the rear of the building. F. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; Staff finds that the requested rezone should not be disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. Through the comp plan process, the City determined that compact, infilJ development is appropriate for the area. Any future change of use on the property that may have a significant impact on the surrounding properties will require conditional use approval under current ordinances, and adjoining property owners will have an opportunity to comment. Staff anticipates that the proposed officelretail building use will not be hazardous or disturbing to the neighboring uses. The Commission and Council should consider all public testimony, oral and written, before making this finding. G. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such service; Staff finds that the proposed uses can be adequately served by all essential public services and facilities. Drainage will need to be retained on site. Please show the proposed drainage facilities on the plans to be revised and resubmitted. H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Staff finds that the requested uses will not create excessive additional requirements at public costs for public facilities and services. Additionally, staff finds that the proposed rezone would not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. I. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment, and conditions that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive pl'oduction of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff finds that the proposed 0- T zoning designation of the property does not inherently allow uses that will generate activities, processes, materials, equipment, and conditions that are detrimental to the general welfare of the community. J, Will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Staff finds that the proposed 0- T zoning will not interfere with general traffic patterns on any public streets. Please refer to the revised ACHD staff report for a full report on traffic issues. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. Staff finds that the existing trees on the site are considered dead or dying and may be removed without mitigation. No other natural or scenic features will be lost or damaged by the project. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City; Staff finds that the proposed rezone would be in the best interest of the City by allowing a property owner to make improvements to the property for re- development that would otherwise not be allowed without the rezone. EXHmIT E The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; The proposed building is 2,674 s.f totaL Ordinance requires 1 per 400 s.f for professional office and 1 off-street parking space per 200 s.ffor retail uses. Thus, for an office use, the project would require 7 spaces. 7 spaces are provided per the site plan. For a retail use, however, the project would require 13 spaces. Staff finds that the subject property, as depicted, is large enough to accommodate the required parking, open spaces and landscaping required by the ordinance for an office use, as long the buffers between land uses are approved under alternative compliance. The site does not have enough space to accommodate parking for a retail use. Therefore staff recommends approval of the project for office or other commercial use provided that parking requirements are met. See condition #2 below. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as Old Town. Staff finds that if the modifications required in this report are done, the application will meet the requirements of the Planned Development and other Zoning Ordinances. See items A and C under the Zoning Amendment Analysis. C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Staff finds the design concept to be compatible with the intended character of the area. See item E under the Zoning Amendment Analysis. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Staff does not anticipate that the proposed development will have an adverse impact on the surrounding property. However, the Commission and Council should consider any testimony given at the public hearings before making this finding. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item G. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item H G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item I. H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item J. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. See comments under the Zoning Amendment Analysis item K. October 1 , 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Larry Knopp CU P 04-020 October 5. 2004 ITEM NO. 5-E REQUEST Findings - Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an L-O zone for Medicap Pharmacy - east of North Ten Mile Road on the north side of West Cheny Lane AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DE?T: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contacted: J....o.v (y ~p EmaiJed: See attached Findings ~tJ-r/ Date: I D '-5 Staff Initials: Phone: ~ Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW j DECISION & ORDER In the Matter of a Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Pharmacy with a Drive- Through in an L-O Zone for Medicap Pharmacy Case No(s). CUP-04-020 For the City Council Hearing Date of: September 14, 2004 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code 967- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the September 14, 2004 public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Those that testified at the public hearing included: 1. In favor - Larry Knopp 11. In opposition - none 111. Commenting - none IV. Staff - Anna Canning c. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2, Process Facts a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code 967-6509,6512, and Meridian City Code SS 11-15-5 and 11-17-5. CffY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER (,A~H Nn(~) rTTP_04_n70 _ PAGF 1 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) of record at the time of issuance ofthese findings is Oakwood Enterprises, LLC. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit D for the findings required for the application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (IC. 967- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code S 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A; the Site Plan dated July, 2004 and revised 9/8/04 and Landscape Plan dated July, 2004 and revised 8/2/04 as shown in Exhibit B; and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit C. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code 9 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: 1. The applicant's CUP Site Plan dated July 2004 is hereby conditionally approved; and CITY OF lvlERIDlAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER f'A~F Nn(~) f'TJP-04_OIO _ PAGF ') 2. The site specific and standard conditions of approval are as shown in Exhibit C. D. Notice of Applicable Time Limits 1. Notice of Eighteen (18) Month Conditional Use Permit Duration Please take notice that the conditional use permit shall be valid for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months unless otherwise approved by the council. During this time, the permit holder must commence the use as permitted in accordance with the conditions of approval, satisfy the requirements set forth in the conditions of approval, acquire building permits and commence construction of permanent footings or structures on or in the ground. In this context "structures" shall include sewer and water lines, streets or building construction. E. Notice of Final Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body ofthe City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code 9 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. F. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Approved Site Plan Exhibit C: Modified Conditions of Approval (in underline and strikeout form per City Council action) Exhibit D: Conditional Use Permit Findings By action ofthe City Council at its regular meeting held on the OG..fv~ ,2004. S-l~ day of COUNCILMAN SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~~ CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER (,A~~ Nn(~) (,TTP_O,L()?O _ PAr.F 1 -eetrNCLL1VlAN HILL NAR Y TlOT13D COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED ~ VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD MAYOR TA.M:MY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED ---- Attest: and City Attorney_ BY:~h!J-. .~lJ)rv-J City Clerk Dated: 10-1 <g-04 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER f'A~H Nn(~~ f'TTP_04_n?O _ PM1H 4 EXHIBIT A All that certain real property situated in Section 2, Township 3 NClrth, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County. Idaho, described as follows; A portion ofthe West half orthe East half oflhe Soulhwest Quarter, being a portion of Parcell of record of Sl1/'Vey No. 3916, filed as Instnlmenr No. 97047432, dated June 16, t 997, of Ada County Records furtber described as (ollows: Commendng al a found brass cap monument marking Ihe Southwest coml!!' of Section 2 from which a found brass cap monument marking the quart~ corner of Sections 2 and 11, bears South 88 degrees 38'31" East, 2,65>.49 feel; thence Soutb 88 degrees J8'31~ ElIBt, 1,326.75 fcello ase! 5/8 inch iron pin wilh cap stamped "G.A. Lee, PEILS 3260" marking the West 1/16 comer and the Southeast comer of Sun burs I Subdivision No.2 a filed in Book 60 of Plats at P3ge 5894, Ada Counly, records; thence along the West 1/16 line and Easl boundary line of said Sunburst Subdivision No.2 North 00 degree 17'24" East, 45.00 feet to a set 5/8 inch iron pin with cap stamped "G.A. Lee, PElLS 3260" marking lbe Southwest comer afParcel I on the North right of way of West Cherry Lane arn:lthe Real Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said West I f16 line and Easl boundary line of Sunbursl Subdivision No.2, North 00 degree 17'24" East, 842.01 feet to a set 5/8 inch iron pin with cap stamped "G.A. Lee, PElLS 3260" mll.rking tbe Nonhwesr comer of .said Porcell ; thence Soulh 89 degrees 42'36" East, 414.65 feet to II set 5/8 inch iron pin with cap stamped "G.A. Lee, PElLS 3260" marking the Northeast comer of said Parcel! on thc West boundary line of Sunny Brook Farms No.2 as filed in Book 46 ofPlal5 at Page 3768, Ada Counly records; thence along the West boundary line of said Sunny Brook Farms No.2, South 00 degree 17'24" West, [49.90 feello a found SIB inch iron pin with cap stamped "J.U.B" at the Soulhwest comer of said Sunny Brook Fal1l15 No.2; thence along the West baundllry line of SUDllY Brook FamlS No.1 as filed In Bool: 44 of Plats at Page 3609. Soulh 00 degree 17'24" Wesl., 699.84 feet 10 a set 5/8 inch iron pin with stamped "G.A. Lee, PEILS 3260" marking the Southeast comer of said Parcel J on the North right of way ofWt:st CherT)' Lane; thence along the North right of way of West Cherry Lane North 88 degrees 38'31" Wesl, 414.73 feet tu the Soulhwest comer of said P.llrcelland the Real PolnlofBeginnlng. Less and ellcepting therefrom the following described property: The North 543 feet ofPan:ell of Record of Survey No. 3916. recorded June 16. 1997 as Inslrument No. 97047432. said Pa~ell being a portion of the West half of the Soulheast Quarter oflhe SOU1hwesr Quarter of Section 2, Township 3 Nonh, Range 1 West, of the Boise Meridian, Ada County Idaho. Also less and excepting the following described propeny: All that certain telll property situated in Section 2, Township 3 North, lUnge 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada Counly, Idaho, described as follows: A portion of the Wesl half of the East half of the Southwest Quarter lying South of the following described line; &;gmning ar the Southwesl/9~er of Parcell ofReeord of Survey No. ?<916 recorded as Instrument No. 97047432:sald corner also being the Rul Pblnl of Beginning of said line, thence Soulh 88 degrees 38'38" East4l4.17 feeHo the Southeast comer of Parcel 1, said comer being the Point of Terminus of said line. . C_M\"')1- .5 fAC?'G- ( ~~.... <= L..,._. .~ ~I"""____;W;I = FrlAA'lI/lQt t>1'<d Off"!i:t f'ci' I-EO]C~P :P~rI~C" \t;.'lC4UJ'lIM KnlUll.:JM.II:" .; Ul;~J 1 .~ f 1:.-6 Ci~:7,~i ! ~ ;~ lit._1..~; I~ i i tI~ L. l~ :~ ~ ~ t . . _._ , ~~ ~~!iS ~ iM 1m!,", i .~!:; j ~ . ~! i '... ' 3101 o ! jr @ ~~g ,. U~ i ii ~ . S; , ... ~ j .., ,- ; ~l! ~~ b Ii ,., . ...> ~ lr ( !:xh',b,t e PA&~ 2- I If f ~_"'--'-Hl. \ ,..............(.......,. I I I I [ j I I I 1 ~ 1"" .~ ~ ~ ". "" .."....ot "'........ .~11 IH ~i.};t.l ~t~i 7-'1:~" r ~t~~ ~Hf ~ ~ +! ,... i " " ~ 't frh g ! ~ i L"'tfwDUD 'PLAZA i .l:JrV1:LOPM(NT ~ &W-lo'Wi('. ~t.. Si&~ t . .i_ .) r :.: l. . tr:"J :. ~ ::. ~ ~ :: ;l ;,J::C: '-i .~1 Ii 'i] ~ il' J ~ $ .," u~lfi ' ! ~ !l"'" r1 ..~, ( ~ .J ,~~ ~. Hi~iE ~~i~~~ W Wf r ~ r. " t r ' ~..~..\~..., ~ ; i 1 i i ~ f.t ~ l ! ! ! ~! r . ..._~.-....., EXHIBIT C The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the requested Conditional Use Permit as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: A. Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows, with a comment from the Commission that many of the required conditions have been addressed in the site/landscape plan provided by the applicant with a revision date of August 2, '04, received by the city clerk August 5,2004: PLANNING & ZONING / PuBLIC WORKS 1. All surface parking shall conform to the minimum dimensions per ordinance of 9' x 19' with 25' wide drive aisles. 2. The landscaping is approved with the following modifications: · The row of parking north of the pharmacy drive through has a narrow planter on the west end. The planter must be widened to be at least 5 feet wide inside curbs and add a tree to the planter. · The row of parking east of the building has a narrow planter on the north end. The planter must be widened to be at least 5 feet wide inside curds and add a tree to the planter. Also add a tree to the planter on the south end of the parking row. e The street buffer along Cherry Lane requires 4 trees; two trees are currently shown. Add two more. · The buffer between land uses must comply with the approved Alternative Compliance established with the final plat for Lynwood Plaza. 3. This conditional use permit shall be subject to the expiration provisions set forth in MCC 11-17-4.B. 4. Applicant must comply with the conditions of the plat for Lynwood Plaza. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. All construction and site improvements shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the adopted building and fire codes. 8. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. Storm water treatment and disposal must be designed in accordance with Department of Environmental Quality 1997 publication Catalog of Storm Water Best Management Practices for Idaho Cities and Counties and City of Meridian standards and policies. Off-site disposal into surface water is prohibited unless the jurisdiction that 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. 9. 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. 10. Sanitary sewer and water service shall be via existing service lines to be installed as part ofthe Lynwood Plaza project. 11. Underground year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided (from an existing system) to a111andscape areas on this site. 12. Submit 10 copies of a revised site and landscape plan to the City Clerk's office at least 10 days prior to the next public hearing on this application. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Acceptance of the water supply for fire protection will be by the Meridian Water Department. 2. Final Approval of the fire hydrant locations shall be by the Meridian Fire Department. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works spec. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers. f Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. 3. The phasing plan may require that any roadway greater than 150' in length that is not provided with an outlet shall be required to have an approved turn around. 4. All entrance and internal roads shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside radius. 5. Provide a 20' wide Fire Lane for all internal & external roadways. 6. Insure that all yet undeveloped parcels are maintained free of combustible vegetation. 7. Operational fire hydrants and temporary or permanent street signs are required before combustible construction begins. 8. Building setbacks shall be per the Building Code for one and two story construction. 9. The roadways shall be built to Ada County Highway Standards and shall have a clear driving surface, available at all times, which is 20' wide. Streets with less than a 29' street width shall have no parking. Streets with less than 33' shall have parking only on one side. 10. Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of300' apart. 11. The fire department requests that any future signalization installed as the result of the development of this project be equipped with Opticom Sensors to ensure a safe and efficient response by fire and emergency medical service vehicles. This cost of this installation is to be borne by the developer 12. Maintain a separation of5' from the building to the dumpster enclosure. 13. Provide a Knoxbox entry system for the complex. 14. Paint the curb red at all fire lanes and provide signage "No Parking Fire Lane". 15. The first digit of the Apartment/Office Suite shall correspond to the floor level. 16. All portions of the buildings located on this project must be within 150' of a paved surface. POLICE DEPARTMENT: 1. The Police Department has no concerns related to the site design submitted with the application. SANITARY SERVICES CORP.: I. Waste enclosure dimensions: Prior to issuance of a certificate of zoning compliance, the applicant shall provide a site plan that has a minimum of 10ft. clearance inside of the enclosure gates with the gates in the open position. 2. The applicant shall verify that the trash enclosures will be approved by NMID in the location depicted on the plans submitted with the application. 3. Please contact Bill Gregory at SSC (888-3999) for detailed review of your proposal and submit stamped (approved) plans with your certificate of zoning compliance application. P ARKS DEPARTMENT: 1. Connect the project to the micropath stub from Devlin Place Subdivision when the building in the northeast corner develops. B. Adopt the Recommendations of ACHD as follows: 1. Comply with the conditions of approval for MPP03-0 13/MCZC03-036, Lynwood Plaza Subdivision C. Adopt the Recommendations ofNampa Meridian Irrigation District as follows: I. Applicant shall apply for a land use change application prior to final platting. 2. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. 3. The District's Rutledge Lateral courses through the proposed project This easement must be protected and any encroachment without a signed License Agreement and approved plan, before any construction is started, is unacceptable. 4. 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. 5. The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. 6. NMID recommends that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. EXHffiIT D The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff STANDARDS FOR CONDITIONAL USES The Commission and Council shall review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed conditional use in terms of the following, and may approve a conditional use permit if they shall find evidence presented at the hearing(s) is adequate to establish (11-17-3): A. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and all yards, open spaces, parking, landscaping and other features as may be required by this ordinance; Staff finds that the subject property is large enough to accommodate the requested use and all other required features as noted above. The building requires 18 parking spaces, as detailed by the applicant on the site plan; 20 spaces are provided. B. That the proposed use and development plan will be harmonious with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and in accordance with the requirements of this Ordinance; The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designates the property as "Office." Staff finds that the proposed retail pharmacy and office uses are harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. If the project is approved as a CUP, it will meet the minimum requirements of the MCc. C. That the design, construction, operation, and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area; Staff finds that the proposed Medicap Pharmacy will not adversely change the existing or intended (office) character of the general vicinity. The proposed project boundary is surrounded on all sides by existing residential subdivisions, which may wish to comment on the drive-through use. The applicant should address any measures taken to minimize noise impacts on adjacent neighbors at the hearing. The project is in substantial compliance with the draft site plan submitted with the preliminary plat. D. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity; Staff does not antIcIpate that the proposed pharmacy will adversely affect adjacent properties. However, the drive through may create noise impacts for adjacent lots. The applicant should address any measures taken to minimize noise impacts on adjacent neighbors at the hearing, such as hours of operation of the drive-through, low volume speakers or handsets, etc. The Commission and Council should consider any testimony (written and oral) presented at the public hearings before making this finding. E. That the proposed use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, street, police, and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; Staff finds that the proposed development can be adequately served by the essential public facilities and services listed above. City water and sewer mains will be constructed within the Lynwood Plaza project. Drainage will be retained on site. Trash enclosures have been provided on-site for refuse disposal; however the applicant should verify that it can be located over the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District easement, as currently depicted. The applicant needs to coordinate with the Fire Department regarding the fire lanes. F. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Staff finds that the proposed pharmacy usage will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community, nor would it create the need for any new facilities or services to be paid for by the public. Staff is unsure as to the suitability of the other potential tenant, as this tenant is not disclosed on the application. However, if the tenant is a permitted use in the L-Q zone, it should not be detrimental. All required improvements, including landscaping, paving, parking, installation of services and roads, etc. will be paid for by the developer. The primary public costs to serve the project will be for fire and police services. G. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment, and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; Staff finds that no excessive traffic, smoke, fumes, glare or odors should result from the proposed medical office use. Refer to ACHD's report for additional information on the traffic production. H. That the proposed use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Staff finds that the proposed use will not create significant interference with any traffic on the surrounding public streets. Please refer to ACHD comments for additional detail on this finding, as noted above. I. That the proposed use will not result in the destl'Uction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature considered to be of major importance. Staff finds that no natural or scenic feature will be lost, damaged or destroyed by issuance ofthis conditional use. October 1, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Leon Smith RZ 04-010 October 5,2004 ITEM NO. 5-G REQUEST Findings - Request for a Rezone of .68 acres from R-4 to an O-T zone for Mittleider Rezone -125 West Cherry Lane and 1645 West 1st Street AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POUCE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: S~C aHo..t\t\~d. fTndln~ ~~ Lwn ShU+h Phone: YY\Jut I Y Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Date: 10-CS Staff Initials: Contacted: Emailed: CITY OF ME FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLU DECISION & 0 oveUa In the Matter of a Request for Rezone of 0.68 Acres Mittleider, Janice Mittleider Smith, and Leon Smith. Case No(s). RZ-04-010 RECEI'VED OCT 0 7 2004 City Of Meridian City Clerk Offic~ For the City Council Hearing Date of: September 14, 2004 A. Findings of Fact 1. Hearing Facts a. A notice of a public hearing was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the City Council public hearing, the first publication appearing and written notice mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property. The notice of public hearing before the City Council was posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing. All other noticing was done consistent with Idaho Code S67- 6509. The matter was duly considered by the City Council at the September 14, 2004 public hearing(s). The applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian were given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. b. Written and oral testimony was received on this matter, as reflected in the records of the City Clerk (for written testimony) and in the official meeting minutes (for oral testimony). Those that testified at the City Council public hearing included: 1. In favor - Leon Smith 11. In opposition - Wallace Newton, Connie Thompson, Sandra Newton, Shirley Smith, and Diane Green 111. Commenting - Gary Inselman, ACHD IV. Staff - Anna Canning c. The Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing and issued a written recommendation on the subject matter to the City Council. d. The City Council heard and took oral and written testimony and dilly considered the evidence and the record in this matter. 2. Process Facts CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-04-010 - PAGE 1 a. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code 967-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code 99 11-15-5 and 11-17-5. 3. Application and Property Facts a. In addition to the application and property facts noted in the staff report and the Planning & Zoning Recommendation for the subject application(s), it is hereby verified that the property owner(s) ofrecord at the time of issuance of these findings are Leon Smith, Janice Mittleider Smith and Nevella Mittleider. 4. Required Findings per Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance a. See Exhibit C for the findings required for the subject application. B. Conclusions of Law 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975," codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (LC. 967- 6503). 2. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code, and all current zoning maps thereof. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Amended Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted August 6, 2002, Resolution No. 02-382 and Maps. 3. The conditions shall be reviewable by the City Council pursuant to Meridian City Code 9 11-17-9. 4. Due consideration has been given to the comment(s) received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction. 5. It is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. 6. That the City has granted an order of approval in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. 7. That this approval is subject to the Legal Description in Exhibit A and the Conditions of Approval in Exhibit B. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. C. Decision and Order Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code 9 12-3-5 and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted, it is hereby ordered that: CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NOeS), RZ-04-01O - PAGE 2 1. The site specific conditions and comments of approval are as shown in Exhibit B. D. Notice of Pinal Action and Right to Regulatory Takings Analysis 1. The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the .time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. 2. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code 967-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit approval may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. E. Exhibits Exhibit A: Legal Description (2) Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval Exhibit C: Rezone Findings By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 5th Of\tobu , 2004. day of COUNCILMAN SHAUN WARDLE VOTED~ VOTED r "eOUl'il'CILMAN BILL NARY COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED~ VOTED* COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD MAYOR TAMMY de WEERD (TIE BREAKER) - VOTED Mayor T CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-04-010 - PAGE 3 dfdL ~,6 \\\\\1111111///1 \\\\ f lIS..- "it \'\..J 0 Mro.~ 'I" ,," .<. "\ ...... i1() /... ..." ~'\ '1 ~ :::..... (j O?POl'f4l'; '1-- ~ .:; ~O <f.'A -::- ~ ~ v ~ ~ - ~ ~ - - - - - - Attest: William G. Berg, Jr., Ci and City Attorney. By: ~l~ City Clerk Dated: 10-14-04 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION & ORDER CASE NO(S). RZ-04-0 10 . PAGE 4 J!I. <. 1'" 6'" :' '. If" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION OF 125 WEST CHERRY LANE EXHIBIT "All Lots 1 and 2 of Block 2 of WILSpN ADDITION TO MERIDIAN, according to the official plat thereof, filed in Book 12 of Plats at 708, records of Ada County, Idaho. EXCEPTING THEREFROM: Any lands on the north boundary of Lots 1 and 2 which fall within the Cherry Lane south right-at-way, identified as any property north of a line 40' from and parallel to the centerline of Cherry Lane. This exception is intended to include IS' of additional right-at-way, to the original 25' of right-ai-way south from the centerline of Cherry Lane. z:: /~ . .- .' ~ ~~" ' ~ON E. SMITH ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this ,~,-^v~e I 204. Zq day of NOTARY PUBLIC for Idaho Commission Expires: 19 JUN 2 004 ~~ ~" I( f1rt~):T A fmrf \ ~ ~ ~~ ~ -~-~--~. ~~.._'-~ ~~- , ,8 ifi',., . ..,.....'.....:~:.. /:,. <c: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION OF 1649 WEST FIRST STREET EXHIBIT IIA" Locs 3 and 4 of Block 2 of WILSON ADDITION TO MERIDIAN, according to the official plat thereof, filed in Book 12 of Plats at 708, records of Ada County, Idaho. EXCEPTING THEREFROM: Any lands on the north boundary of Lots :3 and 4- which fall wi thin the Cherry Lane south right-at-way, identified as any property north of a line 401 from and parallel to the centerline of Cherry Lane. This exception is intended to include 15' of additional right-ai-way, to the original 25' of right-at-way south from the centerline of Cherry Lane. L z::C~ ~E. SMITH . ) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this I LA k.-t , 2004. ?1' day of NOTARY PUBLIC for Idaho Commission Expires: Meridian Public Works Dept. \ 1\ i \ 6 f ~~:rT ~ r" ?~L EXHIBIT B The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the Rezone as requested by the Applicant for the property described in the application, subject to the following: Adopt the Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: A. Adopt the Special Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission as follows: 1. Add a sentence to the end of the second bullet in Site Specific Condition #4 on Page 7 that reads: "Until such timc as thc current use as residential changes, the current access to Cherry Lane is acceptable." B. Adopt the Recommendations of the Meridian Planning & Zoning Department and Public Works Department as follows: ANNEXATION AND ZONING SITE-SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND COMMENTS 1. The submitted legal description appears to meet the requirements of the City of Meridian and State Tax Commission and will place the parcel contiguous to existing city limits. 2. The subject property is within the Urban Services Planning Area. 3. All future development of the subject property shall be constructed in accordance with City of Meridian ordinances in effect at the time of development. 4. Prior to the rezone ordinance approval, a Development Agreement (DA) shall be entered into between the City of Meridian and the property owners. The DA shall require that: · Retail commercial uses (e.g. - convenience stores, service stations, bars, restaurants, retail stores, sales lots, etc.) are prohibited on this site. · }..CCC33 to Cherry Lanc is pf"Ohibitcd. Access to this site will be provided from West 1st Street and West 2nd Street with cross-access between all of the lots. Until sach timc as the current use as residcntial ehangcs, the current access to Cherry Lane is acceptable. · The applicant will be responsible for all costs associated with the sewer and water service upgrade. · Any other conditions desired by the Commission and Council. 5. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service, per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517, when services are available from the City of Meridian. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. C. Adopt the recommendations of the Meridian Fire Department as follows: MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS/CONDITIONS 1. Provide fire hydrant spacing per the International Fire Code. Commercial and office occupancies will require a fire-flow consistent with the International Fire Code to service the proposed project. Fire hydrants shall be placed an average of 300' apart. a. Fire Hydrants shall have the 4 W' outlet face the main street or parking lot aisle. b. The Fire hydrant shall not face a street which does not have addresses on it. c. Fire hydrant markers shall be provided per Public Works specs. d. Locations with fire hydrants shall have the curb painted red 10' to each side of the hydrant location. e. Fire Hydrants shall be placed on comers. f. Fire hydrants shall not have any vertical obstructions to outlets within 10'. 2. All future entrance and internal roads/fire lanes shall have a turning radius of 28' inside and 48' outside. 3. Maintain a separation of 5' between future buildings and dumpster enclosures. 4. All processes & storage practices shall be required to comply with the International Fire Code. 5. Provide exterior egress lighting as required by the International Building & Fire Codes. D. For clarification (per action of the City Council on 9-14-04): 1. Direct access to Cherry Lane is not prohibited with this application. 2. When a development application (CUP) is submitted for this site, notices shall be sent to property owners within 600-feet of said property. EXHIBIT C The City Council hereby approves the following analysis of required findings by staff, with strikethrough modifications, as noted. ANNEXATION & ZONING ANALYSIS According to Ordinance 11-15-11, General Standards Applicable to Zoning Amendments, both the P&Z Commission and Council are required "to review the particular facts and circumstances of each proposed zoning amendment in terms of the following standards and shall find adequate evidence answering the following questions about the proposed zoning amendment. " Thefollowing is the list of standards found in 11-15-11 and analysis by staff: A. Will the new zoning he harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and, if not, has there been an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment; The 2002 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates the east half of the subject property as "Old Town" and the west half of the property as "Medium Density Residential". In Chapter VII of the Comprehensive Plan, Old Town uses will include offices, retail and lodging, theatres, restaurants, and service retail for surrounding residents and visitors. Staff finds that the requested 0- T zoning generally conforms to this stated purpose and intent of the Old Town designation. Please see Special Considerations for Rezone below for further analysis of the proposed zoning designation and the existing Comprehensive Plan Future Land . Use Map designation of this property. Staff finds the following Goals, Objectives, and Action items contained in the 2002 Comprehensive Plan to be applicable to this application (staff analysis is in italics below policy): · "Restrict curb cuts and access points on collectors and arterial streets." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 2) On the submitted conceptual plan, the applicant is proposing direct access to Cherry Lane. This site has frontage on not only Cherry Lane, but also West rt Street and West 2nd Street. Therefore, staff recommends that direct access to Cherry Lane be restricted. See Special Considerations for Rezone below for further analysis. · "Require appropriate landscape and buffers along transportation conidors (setback, vegetation, low walls, berms, etc.)." (Chapter VII, Goal IV, Objective D, Action item 4) An appropriate landscape buffer along Cheny Lane will be required by the City when an applicationfor a CUP/CZC is submitted. · "Locate new community commercial areas on arterials or collectors near residential areas in such a way as to complement with adjoining residential areas." (Chapter VII, Goal I, Objective B, Action item 5) The subject property has Fontage on Cherry Lane, an arterial roadway. Staff believes that the conversion of this property fi"om residential to office will compliment the existing residential uses/structures in the area if designed properly. · "Require all commercial businesses to install and maintain landscaping." (Chapter V, Goal III, Objective D, Action item 5) The applicant is not specifically proposing to install any landscaping with the subject annexation application. Staff is including a condition requiring the applicant to submit for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) which, when processed, will require the applicant to construct landscaping along Cheny Lane and the perimeter of the site. Staff finds that the new zoning to O-T should be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Please see Special Considerations for Rezone below for further analysis. B. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be rezoned in the future; Staff does not anticipate that the applicant intends to rezone the subject property in the future. c. Is the area included in the zoning amendment intended to be developed in the fashion that would be allowed under the new zoning - for example, a residential area turning into commercial area by means of conditional use permits; In the applicant's submittal letter, it is stated that the subject property is intended to be used for dental office purposes. Currently, the only (principally) permitted uses in the O-T zone are single-family homes, libraries, churches, and museums. All other uses in the 0- T zone, that are not prohibited, require separate Conditional Use Permit approvaL D. Has there been a change in the area or adjacent areas which may dictate that the area should be rezoned. For example, have the streets been widened, new railroad access been developed or planned or adjacent area being developed in a fashion similar to the proposed rezone area; The general vicinity of this project is changing rapidly. In this area there are several other parcels that have/are/will be converting from residential to office and commercial uses. On the north side of Cherry Lane, between Meridian Road and Linder Road, and along Main Street, there are many sites that have converted to office and commercial uses. Due to increasing traffic volumes on Cherry Lane, staff believes that the use of this property for residential purposes is not the best use of the land. Although Cherry Lane has not been widened recently, it is currently a 5-lane roadway (center turn lane), with curb, gutter and sidewalk in this area. Staff finds that rezoning this site to 0- T is consistent with other land uses and facility changes in the area. E. Will the proposed uses be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; The applicant is not proposing a specific use or building design with this application. Staff finds that the anticipated office/clinic use if designed, constructed and operated in accordance with adopted city ordinances, through a future CUP/CZC application(s), should be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and intended character of the vicinity. F. Will the proposed uses not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; Staff finds that the use of this site for professional office/clinic purposes should not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses if all development and landscaping ordinances are exercised. The Commission and Council should rely on public testimony to determine whether the proposed O-T zoning will be disturbing or hazardous to the neighboring residential, quasi- public, and/or commercial uses. G. Will the area be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fIre protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed zoning amendment shall be able to provide adequately any of such services; All essential public facilities and City services listed above currently serve this site, however, upgrading may be necessary to provide a level of service different from a residential use. Staff finds that the current configuration of Cherry Lane, and the anticipated widening of Meridian Road in this area should be adequate to serve this site into the future. On July 23, 2004, a joint agency/department comments meeting was held with representatives of key service providers to this property. The Meridian Fire Department has concerns with serviceability of this site as an office/clinic, as the fire hydrants near this site may not be located in accordance with the International Fire Code (all of the detailed conditions from the Fire Department and other agencies/departments are at the end ofthis report). The Commission and Council should reference any written or verbal testimony submitted by the Meridian Police Department, and any other agency providing service to this site, regarding their ability to adequately service this project. Staff finds that the property proposed for rezone can be served adequately by all essential public facilities and services. H. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; Staff finds that changing the zoning of this site will not cause excessive additional requirements at public cost. Other required site improvements will be funded and constructed by the developer through the CUP/CZC process. Staff also finds that the rezoning of this site to 0- T will not be detrimental to the community's economic welfare. I. Will the proposed uses not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; The applicant is not proposing a specific use for this property at this time. It is anticipated that a professional office(s) or dental/medical c1inic(s) may be constructed on this site in the future. Staff finds that an office/clinic type use will create additional traffic on adjacent arterial roads. Further, the parking and maneuvering of cars on the site may generate additional noise for surrounding properties. However, staff does not believe that the additional noise should be excessive. Staff does not anticipate an office/clinic use will create excessive smoke, fumes, glare, or odors that will be detrimental to any person, property or the general welfare of the area. To ensure this finding, all future uses on this site will be required to go through the Conditional Use Permit and/or Certificate of Zoning Compliance process and will be subject to compliance with City Code. J. Will the area have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public streets; Future vehicular access points to Cherry Lane, West 1 st Street, and West 2nd Street should comply with ACHD policies. In order to prcSCfVC thc capacity and movement on Cherry Lafic, staff recommends that vehicular approaches to Chcny Lanc be pmhibited and access to this sitc be pm.tided from Vo,r C3t 1 st Street and Wcst 2M Strect. If a vehicular approach is approved to the site that is designed and constructed in accordance with ACHD policies, staff finds that the approach(es) will not create an interference with traffic on the surrounding public street(s). Please see Special Considerations below and review any comments from ACHD for additional information regarding this finding. K. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance; and Staff is not aware of any natural or scenic feature(s) that would be lost, damaged or destroyed by allowing this site to be rezoned and developed with office/clinic uses. Any existing trees larger than 4" caliper that are removed shall be mitigated for, per the Landscape Ordinance. L. Is the proposed zoning amendment in the best interest of the City of Meridian. (Ord. 592,11-17-1992)" For the reasons listed in the .findings above, staff finds that the rezoninf! of this lJrOlJertv would be in the best interest of the Citv. October 1, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 5, 2004 ITEM NO. 5-1 REQUEST Approve Beer and Wine License Renewal for Quik-Wok - 3055 East Fairview Avenue AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: ~r/ Confacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ;: October 1, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT REQUEST Well #25 Control System October 5, 2004 ITEM NO. 5~J AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEITLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached p;tf"/ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: MaterIals presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of MeridIan. RECEIVED City ot MeriClian "." Public Works. DeRt." " sr i) 3 lJ 2004 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office Memo To: Brad Watson, City Engineer From: Clint Dolsby, Staff Engineer cc: Len Grady, Staff Engineer Date: 9/29/2004 Re: Proposed Agenda Item for October 5, 2004 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following item be placed on the October 5 City Council agenda, under Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: Well #25 Control System. Custom Electric, Inc. submitted a quote to install a control system at Well #25 which is $9,220.00. This control system will provide communication and control from the Well to the SCADA system. This project consists of construction of a SCADAPAK, modem, touchscreen 01, terminal blocks, enclosure, power supply, programming and start-up for the Well #25 Control System. Recommended Council Action: The Public Works Department recommends that City Council approves the contract for the Well #25 Control System with Custom Electric; Inc. for $9,220.00 and authorize the Mayor to sign it. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. . Page 1 October 1, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 5,2004 ITEM NO. 5-K REQUEST Streetlight Agreement for Woodside Creek AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached w~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at pUblic meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. City of Meridian Public Works Dept. RECEIVED SEP 3 0 2004 City Of Meridian City Clerk Office Memo To: Mayor de Weerd & City Council From: Karie Glenn cc: File Date: 9/28/2004 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for October 5, 2004 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests that the following items be placed on the October 5, 2004 City Council agenda, on the Consent Agenda, for Council's consideration: 1) Streetlight Aqreement for Woodside Creek. Typical Streetlight Agreement. Recommended Council Action: Approve the Streetlight Agreement for Woodside Creek and authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest. Thank you for your consideration. . Page 1 v....I""l...V' '-IJV~ L"LUlm No.H~l p. L STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT This Street Light Agreement is made and entered into between the CITY OF MERIDIAN and Woodside Properties. pertaining to the street lights in Woodside Creek, a residential develppment in Meridian, Idaho. For good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: L Woodside Properties. has provided 4ea. Single head, street light poles; concrete pole bases. fixtures, bulbs, and components to the resiqential development lrnown as Woodside Creek in Meridian,. Idaho_ The parties acknowledge that the 400. Single head street light poles and appurtenances vvere specially ordered items) not customarily llSed in residential developments in Meridian,. Idaho. 2. Woodside Properties, 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 brok~ damag~, or deteriorated, or require maintenance, at its own expense; and it is further agieed that Woodside Properties, 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 4ea. Singl~ head street lights l~cated in Woodside Creek 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. s. It is understood and agreed that Woodside Properties. will assign its rights and obligations hereunder to when said Homeowners Association is formed and operationaL . . STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page I I~O,It~~1 1-', j This AGREEMENT shall be binding on Woodside Properties. 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~ Mayor, DeWeerd ATTEST: William G, Berg, Jr., City Clerk Woodside Prop~ies By ~~ tL~~ ATTEST: Secretary STREET LIGHr AGREEMENT Page 2 "-Vi,' i L.' L./I III NO,4HHl p. 4 STATE 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 Mayor DEWEERD and WlLLIAM G, BERG, JR, }mown to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, Idaho> and who executed the within instrwnent, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. SEAL NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RESIDING AT MY COMMISSION EXPIRES STATE OF ,) ,) : SS. County of . On this ;2~ day of5.wr_ __ , 201>4 , befure me, the under~ed, a Notary Public In and for sald State, personally appeared:r ~~ - t;;. p and known to me to be the President and Secretary of VJ~~~-s.lVe ?aQ?~G:5 -, and who executed the within instnunent on behalf of said corporation" and acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same. IN WITNESS WlffiREOF~ I have:flereumo set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. . SEAL c/IJ toItJJ ~ NOTARY PUBUC FOlt IDAHO - RESIDING AT &&c/:i'~ 8"37/q- MY COMMISSION EXPIRES ~ I )-;)./ C)~ STREET LIGHT AGREEMENT Page 3 October 1, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 5, 2004 ITEM NO. 5-M REQUEST Approve Bills AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATIORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUilDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: #~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of MeridIan. October 1 , 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 5, 2004 APPLICANT ITEM NO. 17 REQUEST Water, Sewer & Trash Delinquencies AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POUCE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: Contocted: Emoiled: Date: Staff Initiols: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the Cily of Meridian. RECEIVED OCT - 5 2004 DELINQUENCY FOR TURN OFF SCHEDULED FOR October 6, 2004 CYCLE 2 City of Meridian City Clerk Office MAYOR: This is to inform you in writing, if you so choose, that you have the right to a pre-termination hearing at 7:30 P.M. Tuesday, October 5, 2004, before the Mayor and City Council, to appear in person to be judged on the facts and to defend the claim made by this City that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counseL This service will be discontinued on October 6, 2004 unless. payment is received in full. Is there anyone ! present whowishestocontesthis or her water, sewer and;: trash delinquency? (No response.) MAYOR: They are hereby informed that they may appeal or have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court, pursuant to Idaho State Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off. The amount of the tum-offlist is $30,489.86 RECEIVED OCT - 5 2004 DELINQUENCY FOR TURN OFF SCHEDULED FOR October 6, 2004 CYCLE 2 City of Meridian City Clerk Office MAYOR: This is to inform you in writing, if you so choose, that you have the right to a pre-termination hearing at 7:30 P.M. Tuesday, October 5, 2004, before the Mayor and City Council, to appear in person to be judged on the facts and to defend the claim made by this City that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel. This service will be discontinued on October 6, i 2004 unless paymentis received in fulL Is there anyone "presentwho wishes to contest his or her water, sewerandi." trash delinquency? (No response.) MAYOR: They are hereby informed that they may appeal or have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court, pursuant to Idaho State Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off. The amount of the tum-offlist is $30,489.86 .. Cl'rY OF MERIDIAN ( ( Delinquent Account List- council Page: 1 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:33pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Report Criteria: Tenninated customers not included Customer.Cust No 0 = (<) 880000001 Customer. Bill Cycle = 2 Last Pmt Last Pm! Cust No Name Balance Non-Oelinq 08/20/2004 07/20/2004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 8.15.0030.1 A & R FRAMING 132.40 69.04 50.20 13.16 07/27/2004 22.00 - 13.13.8426.2 A.M. THOMPSON MOON LAKE TI 67.53 66.82 .71 09/2112004 55.00 - 18.42.2992.4 ABLEMAN, DOUG & ANGELA 85.22 42.12 43.10 09/07/2004 89.14 - 17.34.2728.5 ACKERMAN, ELAINE 92.51 67.12 25.39 09/01/2004 100.00 - 9.09.9144.2 ALIAS, MICHAEL 85.52 48.28 37.24 09/21/2004 39.90 - 16.31.3422.1 ALLEN, SEDENA 136.84 67.02 66.98 .84 08/31/2004 72.00 - 18.43.0426.2 ALONZO, MITO & KATHLEEN 85.36 43.66 41.70 08/06/2004 43.66 - 15.15.0110.2 ALTA 166.22 46.44 74.48 45.30 08/04/2004 125.00 - 14.19.6556.2 AMAR, STEVE 60.26 31.38 28.88 09/10/2004 28.88 - 10.10.2258.1 AMYX SIGATURE HOMES 101.30 81.30 20.00 09121/2004 26.44 - 15.21.1784.1 ANDERSEN,SHARRON 116.42 68.16 48.26 09/07/2004 40.00 - 15.15.0037.2 ANDERSON. EDWARD 42.57 6.13 34.44 07/12/2004 37.38 - 15.21.0566.1 ANDERSON, JAMES 96.30 42.76 53.54 08/2512004 55.50 - 14.19.1360.1 ANDERSON, KIRK & CHERYL 80.71 10.31 17.60 52.80 04/27/2004 35.20 - 14.19.0068.2 ANDERSON, SKIP & JULIE 158.46 48.90 52.82 56.74 07/19/2004 29.02 - 16.32.0482.2 ANSON,REBECCA 108.23 70.38 37.85 10104/2004 50.00 - 15.15.0638.2 ARCHULETA, STEVEN & HILLY [ 50.78 46.86 3.92 09123/2004 43.92 - 14.20.2006.1 ARNETT, DUKE 90.90 43.98 46.92 08/10/2004 41.04 - 18.42.3070.3 ARNOLD, RYAN & LACY 120.00 45.88 37.06 37.06 07/19/2004 11.95 - 17,39.0002.1 ASIN HOMES 25.24 22.59 2.65 08/13/2004 22.62 - 3.90.0152.1 ASPEN HOMES. 18.30 14.82 3.48 08/03/2004 1.04 - 9.09.0644.1 ASPEN HOMES 27.62 23.16 4.46 3.90.0244.1 ASPEN HOMES 126.24 66.68 55.10 4.46 3.90.0096.1 ASPEN HOMES 34.98 28.76 6.22 08/03/2004 3.48- 3.90.0004.1 ASPEN HOMES 65.96 44.62 21.36 08/03/2004 8.23 - 16.32.0518.2 ATKINSON, DALE 108.10 62.18 45.92 08/23/2004 100.00 - 14.19.1674.2 ATWELL, KENNETH 51.88 25.94 25.94 08/24/2004 25.94 " 17.33.4274.2 BACON ,THOMAS 82.84 44.90 37.94 09/07/2004 68.00 - 18.42.2076.2 BAISCH. SHELLY 103.50 69.06 34.44 07/29/2004 160.00 - 9.92.7020.3 BALLARD, MICHAEL & JACQUE 41.73 40.54 1.19 17.33.2646.2 BALNG TRUST 81.96 40.98 40.98 08/30/2004 41.96- 17.34.2738.2 BARBEY, THOMAS 83.92 38.04 45.88 17.33.3594.2 BARBEY, THOMAS 75.10 38.04 37.06 17.34.2768.2 BARBEY, THOMAS 79.60 48.40 31.20 17.33.2568.2 BARBEY, THOMAS & BARBARA 70.02 34.02 34.02 1.98 07/0212004 26.80 - 17.33.1862.4 BARKER. JOHN 92.74 37.06 55.68 18.42.2372.1 BARNES, CHRISTY 122.46 65.64 56.82 08/11/2004 60.74 - 18.42.3088.1 BAUDER, KEN 160.06 48.56 73.66 37.84 08/04/2004 100.00 - 13.13.1200.3 BEATON, BONNIE 97.52 55.80 41.72 09/24/2004 41.72 - 18.42.2280.3 BEHLER, ERIC 83.72 37.94 45.78 08/25/2004 49.70 - 17.33.2316.1 BELL, RICHARD 124.02 94.92 29.10 10104/2004 85.00 - 17.33.1828.1 BELL, RONALD & JULIE 75.08 33.62 41.46 09107/2004 80.96 - 3.03.5064.1 BELLO HOMES 64.31 41.18 19.85 3.48 07/21/2004 2.13 - 17.33.2772.3 BENNETT, GREG 104.00 52.00 52.00 08/3112004 52.90 - 14.19.6688.1 BENNETT, MASON 119.10 37.50 39.90 41.70 07/21/2004 71.00. 15.21.0130.1 BESKER, GLORIA 120.34 61.64 58.70 09/0212004 66.54 - 18.42.1798.1 BETTENCOURT, RICHARD 74.10 64.10 10.00 10/05/2004 20.00 - 15.21.1410.2 BETZOLD, MARK & SHARON 178.66 75.80 102.86 08/04/2004 148.66 - 15.21.3298.5 BEUTLER, SHANE 193.90 105.66 88.02 .22 07/29/2004 157.20 - 15.22.1740.3 BINGHAM. DUNCAN & PAULINE 56.92 28.46 28.46 09/14/2004 35.38- ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent i,. I " CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 2 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:34pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pm! Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/20/2004 07/20/2004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 15.21.2100.1 BINGHAM, J. ANTHONY 42.68 41.70 .98 09/3012004 41.70 - 15.22.1342.2 BISIG, JOSEPH W 156.26 101.16 55.10 08/27/2004 64.90 - 14.19.0192.1 BITTON, GREG 74.78 41.58 33.20 08/06/2004 69.34 - 16.31.3372.2 BLACK, KENNETH 49.80 43.92 5.88 09/30/2004 43.92 - 17.33.2600.1 BLACKHURST,SCOTT 76.72 37.36 39.34 09/0712004 76.72 - 15.22.1066.3 BLAIR, MARY BETH 221.58 56.56 106.53 55.68 2.81 10.20.0020.1 BOB BROWN 39.70 21.08 18.62 0811212004 3.48. 15.21.1828.3 BONNER, JOHN & GLENDA 109.86 34.66 40.54 34.66 07/0212004 61.46 . 17.34.3314.2 BORTON, JAMES 190.92 92.52 98.40 08/10/2004 104.28 . 15.21.0064.2 BORUP, BRENT & JEANETTE 103.84 49.96 53.88 08/3112004 64.66 . 10.10.0626.1 BOSSLER, LISA 149.96 64.62 53.30 32.04 06/09/2004 60.00 - 15.21.3068.1 BOYDSTUN, PATRICK & JUDY 142.38 63.84 78.54 09/07/2004 83.44 - 8.06.5002.2 BOYER, LYNN 109.72 40.54 37.06 32.12 10.10.0096.2 BRADBERRY,JOSEPH 127.88 48.54 40.16 39.18 08/10/2004 54.18 - 15.22.0840.1 BRAINARD, ROBERT & JEREEN 105.60 52.80 52.80 08/24/2004 52.80 - 9.09.0340.2 BRANCH, AMBER 99.30 54.82 44.48 08/0312004 46.44 - 15.21.1054.1 BRAUNSTEIN, BERNARD & KAR 96.78 68.98 27.80 09/27/2004 50.00 - 16.16.3306.2 BREWER, CHRIS & ELIZABETH 88.68 87.88 .80 09108/2004 113.00- 15,22.2282.2 BRICE, DAVID 72.60 40.22 32.38 07/28/2004 93.78 - 16.32.0926.1 BRIGGS, NADINE 190.38 106.76 83.62 09/08/2004 92.44 - 16.32.0504.3 BRIGHT, ARRON & SONIA 93.06 43.10 49.96 09/1312004 99.92 - 3.03.5632.1 BRIT-TENOW, KEVIN & MIA 37.19 30.69 3.48 3.02 3.03.5372.1 BROADWAY HOMES 14.54 11.06 3.48 08/11/2004 2.32 - 3.03.5072.1 BROADWAY HOMES 70.47 28.60 41.87 08111/2004 6.42- 3.03.5052.1 BROADWAY HOMES 20.53 17.05 3.48 08111/2004 2.32 - 3.03.5020.1 BROADWAY HOMES INC 53.72 32.36 21.36 08/11/2004 28.38 - 15.21.0110.1 BROWN, ADAM 107.26 54.12 53.14 08/17/2004 56.08 - 10.20.0078.1 BROWN, BOB 15.52 11.06 4.46 08/1212004 1.04 - 17.33.3762.1 BROWN, DOMONIC 94.78 48.66 46.12 08/30/2004 47.26. 8.08.0144.2 BRUCE, TIMOTHY 175.34 82.74 92.60 09/0212004 54.72. 17.34.2736.1 BRUTSMAN,RONALD 129.36 62.72 64.68 1.96 09107/2004 64.68 . 17.33.1652.1 BUNDY, DOYLE 55.36 38.36 17.00 08/30/2004 59.72 . 15.15.0750.2 BURGESS, ALAN & STEPHANIE 72.80 36.40 36.40 08/06/2004 73.78 . 17.34.0856.1 BURGESS. UN 83.78 82.80 .98 09/21/2004 95.00 - 17.33.2264.2 BURNS, E. GALE 82.52 43.42 38.52 .58 08/0612004 64.30 - 17.34.1456.1 BURROUGHS, JEFF 79.82 61.90 17.92 09/21/2004 100.00 - 6.06.9212.2 BUSH, PHILLIP 39.73 29.01 10.72 09/15/2004 15.00 - 18.42.0446.2 CADA, STEVENS, ROSE & LAW. 80.98 40.98 40.00 08/17/2004 40.98. 15.22.2396.2 CAIRL, SCOTT & DENISE 107.46 53.24 54.22 08126/2004 54.22 . 14.20.0436.1 CALEB LUETHOLD 86.98 38.10 48.88 07/30/2004 38.02 - 16.31.1274.1 CALLISON, JAMES & BARBARA 116.06 53.62 62.44 09/01/2004 112.14 - 15.21.0522.1 CALWELL, MARC 79.80 40.88 36.92 09/0712004 74.70 - 16.31.3536.2 CAMPBELL, SCOTT 57.76 28.88 28.68 08/0612004 66.58 - 15.21.2800.1 CAMPBELL, RON 250.39 22.90 227.49 OS/2712004 193.06 - 16.32.1592.1 CARLYLE, KEITH 41.48 38.92 2.56 09/27/2004 40.00 - 17.34.2114.1 CARR,NANCY 34.84 34.84 09/10/2004 90.00 - 15.22.1160.3 CARSON, PAMELA 132.40 60.08 72.32 09108/2004 76.74 - 15.22.1736.2 CASH, RONALD 60.70 26.88 31.82 08106/2004 28.88 - 16.32.1274.1 CATHCART,CHARLES 87.64 42.84 44.80 08/24/2004 52.64 - 3.18.0410.1 CHAMBERS CONSTRUCTION 10.27 8.92 1.35 16.31.3028.4 CHAMBERS, IVAN & GLORIA 124.46 61,04 63.42 08/06/2004 50.68. 15.21.1402.2 CHAPMAN, JAMES 112.39 54.22 53.24 4.93 09/0112004 60.00. 15.22.0848.1 CHAPMAN, THOMAS 190.92 91.54 99.38 09/07/2004 100.46. 15.21.2658.1 CHAPPELL, ANTHONY 122.42 76.32 46.10 09/07/2004 100.00 . 15.22.1424.1 CHAVEZ, ROBERTO 205.60 109.66 95.94 08127/2004 93.98. ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ~. . " ( ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 3 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:34pm Current Period; 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pm! Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/20(2004 07/2012004 06120/2004 Date Amount 16.32.0360.1 CHERRY LANE MOBILE PARK 1,469.09 1 ,468.30 .79 09/09/2004 1 ,795.04 - 18.42.4080.2 CHIESA, BRYCE 112.42 66.70 45.72 08/03(2004 45.72 - 15.15.0034.2 CHRISTENSEN, BRANDON & ME 78.82 39.90 38.92 08/26/2004 39.90 - 15.15.0047.2 CHRISTENSEN, DAVID 108.80 57.62 51.18 08/31/2004 53.70 . 6.06.9006.2 CHRISTENSEN, MATHEW & TAr, 51.60 29.01 22.59 07128/2004 45.18 - 18.42.3092.2 CHRISTENSEN, SHARON 119.96 30.84 70.44 18.68 10/04/2004 30.84 - 15.15.2000.1 CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF 264.70 159.95 104.75 08/13/2004 37.07 - 17.33.4344.1 CIRELLI, MARK 111.68 52.90 58.78 09/2112004 48.98 - 7.40.0094.1 CLARK, RICKY 91.64 48.54 43.10 08/09/2004 39.18 - 6.06.1346.3 CLUFF. PAUL 88.32 41.27 29.95 17.10 15.22.2104.2 COE, JEFFREY 66.72 32.38 34.34 06106/2004 38.26 - 15.21.2048.4 COLBURN, RICHARD 56.12 34.44 21.68 08/0212004 20.00 - 18.42.2762.1 COLLINS, MICHAEL & SHIRLEY 130.96 68.42 62.54 07/30(2004 120.18 - 16.31.2268.2 COLSON, CAROL 171.92 60.48 92.44 19.00 08/04/2004 100.00. 17.33.2566.2 CONNELL, EDWARD 142.26 50.62 49.64 42.00 09/16/2004 55.00 - 17.33.2328.1 COPELAND, WILLIAM 68.74 59.84 8.90 09f07/2004 100.00 - 17.34.2786.1 CORCORAN,BRADLEY 79.34 39.18 40.16 06124/2004 38.20 - 8.08.1002.1 COREY BARTON HOEMS 36.03 21.08 14.95 09/21/2004 17.60 - 8.08.1000.1 COREY BARTON HOMES 39.46 27.36 12.10 09/21 (2004 23.88 - 15.15.0134.3 COSSEL, TRAVIS & CANDICE 40.21 39.02 1.19 15.22.2628.2 COSTNER, SHANNON 58.64 41.86 16.78 08/06/2004 64.98 - 15.21.1740.2 COX, JAY & CARROL 218.82 102.35 116.47 09/09/2004 112.75 - 15.22.0922.4 COX, KATHY 239.88 69.96 169.92 07129/2004 97.40 - 6.06.1282.1 CRANE, ANDREA 54.99 47.15 7.84 10/05/2004 30.93 - 17.34.0492.1 CRAW, GARY 75.28 60.58 14.70 08/24/2004 122.14 - 15.22.1650.4 CRAWFORD, DAN 127.70 62.10 50.78 14.82 3.03.5028.1 CRESTMARK CUSTOM HOMES 62.08 38.80 23.28 07/12/2004 17.60 - 10.,10.2216.1 CRESTWOOD CONSTRUCTION 101.94 50.50 51.44 08/26/2004 51.44 - 16.32.1634.1 CROSBY, ,CRAIG 80.98 38.04 42.94 08/04/2004 54.70 - 16.32.1178.4 CROSE, JEFFREY 173.88 63.84 66.78 43.26 08/24/2004 65.80 - 18.42.2370.4 CROW, KEN & ALICIA 145.08 83.52 61.56 08103/2004 128.02 - 14.19.0112.1 CRUST, PHILLIP 81.42 38.92 42.50 08/0312004 87.00 - 16.31.3336.1 CRYER, JUDITH 147.86 82.56 65.30 09/09/2004 69.22 - 15.22.1149.1 CRYSTAL SPRINGS HOMEOWN 282.34 135.78 146.56 08/3112004 216.68 - 13.13.8938.2 CULLUM, JERRY & NOVELLA 77.72 42.56 35.16 09/07/2004 38.10 - 14.20.0196.3 CUMMINGS, GORDON & CAROL 88.82 44.90 43.92 08/11/2004 44.90 - 6.06.1930.1 CUPP, SHAD & BECKY 97.54 69.63 27.91 09/08/2004 60.00 - 15.15.0846.1 CURTIS, JASON 57.76 28.88 26.88 08/1 0/2004 25.12 - 15.21.2922.4 CUTLER, KIMBERLY 261.90 102.72 159.18 09101/2004 92.36 - 18.42.2388.2 DALY, BERT 168.24 99.16 69.08 09109/2004 100.00 . 14.20.1612.1 DALY, RON 69.66 37.28 32.38 09/07/2004 67.70. 14.19.1028.1 DANIEL FOUTZ 51.88 25.94 25.94 08/06/2004 30.84 . 18.42.0346.2 DARRON STOUT 143.12 79.70 63.42 09/0812004 50.68 . 10.10.2362.1 DARYL WILSON CONSTRUCTIO 181.42 50.50 47.68 51.44 31.80 15.22.1420.1 DAVENPORT, DUANE 136.54 47.58 46.60 42.36 08/23/2004 47.58 . 15.21.1820.1 DAVIS, MARK 106.36 51.10 47.18 8.08 08/1912004 100.00 . 3.03.5178.2 DAVIS, ROMAN & HEATHER 50.34 48.38 1.96 09/30/2004 40.98 - 15.22.2226.1 DAVIS, STEVEN 39.38 37.70 1.68 08(26/2004 60.00 - 17.34.1770.1 DAVIS, WADE & WYNETTE 79.32 58.78 20.54 10104/2004 50.00 - 15.21.0454.3 DAWDY, DEBRA. & CALVIN 43.90 28.62 15.28 07/2212004 42.94 - 17.33.0282.1 DAY,ETHEL 68.22 32.64 35.58 08/06/2004 66.26 - 14.14.4324.1 DBD INC. 94.60 52.04 42.56 09/1712004 33.00 - 15.15.3010.2 DE JONG, JEANETTE 78.59 42.94 35.65 15.21.3070.1 DECK, KIMBERLY 139.48 69.24 70.24 09/08/2004 65.00 . 16.31.3482.2 DELANEY, BRUCE & LAURA 80.00 39.02 40.98 08/03/2004 46.82 . ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CIlY OF MERIDIAN ( Delinquent Account List. council Page; 4 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:35pm Current Period: 10105/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Ba lance Non-Delinq 08/20/2004 07/20/2004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 15.21.0206.3 DELANEY, MELISSA 143.80 93.90 49.90 09/07/2004 50.00 - 17.33.3704.1 DIEM, JAHN 85.86 42.94 42.94 08/11/2004 43.92. 3.03.5760.1 DODGE ENTERPRISES INC 10.83 8.92 1.91 14.19.4454.2 DOHERTY, GREG 90.66 49.52 41.14 08/26/2004 41.14 - 15.21.0144.1 DOMKA, DEBBIE 71.30 36.14 35.16 08104/2004 67.08 . 17.33.2612.6 DONALDSON, NEAL 99.20 62.64 36.56 09108/2004 54.36 - 17.33.2594.2 DONALDSON, NEAL 82.72 42.68 40.04 09/0712004 45.00 - 3.03.5074.1 DOUBLE DUTCH 35.12 26.80 4.84 3.48 3.03.5390.1 DOUBLE DUTCH DEVELOPMEN' 14.54 11.06 3.48 06117/2004 1.04 - 3.03.5392.1 DOUBLE DUTCH DEVELOPMEN' 43.74 25.82 17.92 08117/2004 25.78 - 3.03.5010.1 DOUBLE DUTCH DEVELOPMEN' 36.22 24.84 11.38 08/17/2004 24.80 - 3.03.5362.1 DOUBLE DUTCH DEVELOPMEN' 19.28 14.82 4.46 08/17/2004 1.04 - 18.42.4202.1 DOUGHTY, KELLY 89.94 45.46 44.48 07/29/2004 87.98 - 11.20.0001.1 DRAWBRIDGE SUB 111.40 110.84 .56 15.22.2418.2 DUFF, DEAN & LAURIE 83.90 44.40 39.50 08124/2004 75.76 - 17.34.0398.1 DUNCAN, RICHARD 134.56 65.32 69.24 08/11/2004 82.96 - 9.09.0006.1 DUNSTAN, KYLE & LAUREL 53.73 22.08 17.62 10.55 3.48 14.20.1504.3 DUPREE, JOHN 46.58 31.40 15.18 08/2712004 100.00 - 18.42.2598.2 EASTBURN,GARY 137.66 65.40 72.26 09/1 512004 92.84 - 17 .34.1898.1 EDINGER, REX S. 137.30 66.20 71.10 08/30/2004 126.52 - 16.31.3034.1 EDWARDS, MARILYN 137.52 30.84 58.28 48.40 07/07/2004 75.00 - 15.22.1502.2 EDWARDS, ROBERT 241.20 150.20 91.00 09/10/2004 1 20.00 - 15.21.2066.2 EDWARDS. YORI 38.14 20.54 17.60 08/03/2004 17.60 - 16.32.1258.2 ELAM, ROGER & PHAEDRA 132.88 52.42 80.46 09/0712004 55.36 - 14.19.1212.1 ELLIOTT CONSTRUCTION 54.00 28.88 25.12 08/1 7/2004 17.60 - 8.08.1106.2 ELLIS, AMY 87.40 47.40 40.00 08/13/2004 41.96 - 15.21.2876.1 ERNESTO, BRIAN 47.88 46.44 1.44 09115/2004 45.00 - 14.14.3710.2 FERRIN, BYRON 82.82 45.60 37.22 08117/2004 37.22 - 15.21.0968.3 FIELDING, J. DAVID & ALISON 278.08 146.88 131.20 08/25/2004 104.18. 15.21.2690.2 FINN, STEPHANIE 117.68 48.06 69.62 08/25/2004 69.62. 18.42.0466.2 FISCHER, DAVID 119.36 62.62 56.74 09/0712004 56.74. 16.16.3640.2 FITZEN, LARAE & LINDA 89.28 44.64 44.64 08/17/2004 87.32- 16.32.1380.1 FLEDDERJOHANN, DIANE 82.20 57.70 24.50 08/10/2004 36.34 - 18.42.3024.1 FOSTER, RAYMOND 57.94 54.94 3.00 09108/2004 50.96 - 15.22.2586.2 FRANKLYN, MARK & DONNA 94.32 47.16 47.16 08/16/2004 94.32 - 6.06.1318.2 FRETWELL, ALEXANDER & JENI 65.00 35.71 29.29 08/03/2004 83.95 - 16.32.1542.1 FUHRMAN, JOSHUA 84.56 41.30 43.26 08/17/2004 46.20 - 16.31.0176.2 FULLER, MELISSA 171.52 76.94 94.56 09/0712004 81.84. 17.34.0806.1 GABRIEL, RON 50.60 35.90 14.70 08/31/2004 64.32 - 10.10.0634.1 GALLERY HOMES 108.64 60.96 47.68 08/1212004 3.96 - 17.33.7602.1 GALLION, RICHARD 61.44 27.49 33.95 08/1212004 33.00 - 15.22.2608.2 GALLOWAY, JERMAINE & KRiSl 79.66 40.88 38.78 09/07/2004 34.00 - 16.31.0226.4 GARCIA, REANA 80.00 40.00 40.00 09107/2004 40.98 - 17.33.2302.1 GARRARD, DALE 110.18 36.40 35.42 38.36 08/11/2004 36.40 - 15.21.0234.3 GARRETT, DAMON 146.54 47.98 98.56 08/04/2004 187.60 - 13.13.8446.3 GIBBS, JOSEPH & GAYLENE 122.68 63.08 59.60 08/05/2004 135.68 - 6.06.9208.1 GNG CONSTRUCTION 72.80 38.49 34.31 06/08/2004 26.41 - 14.19.1060.1 GOECKERITZ, JEREMY & REBE' 38.20 34.28 3.92 09/0712004 37.22 - 15.22.1622.4 GOHR, DOUGLAS 133.20 54.60 72.24 6.36 08/0612004 60.00 - 18.42.11 76.1 GOLDENFEATHER HUD HOUSI~ 46.44 46.44 07106/2004 88.96 . 16.31.3374.1 GOULDING, PAULINE 166.10 56.02 51.12 58.96 07106/2004 105.77 - 13.13.8906.2 GRADlAN, MICHAEL 133.74 75.96 57.78 07123/2004 104.22 - 9.09.9268.2 GRANERE, DAVID & CHRISTINE 94.71 46.00 41.54 7.17 08/17/2004 38.04 - 16.32.1256.2 GRASS, JOYCE 48.16 23.32 21.36 3.48 07/0212004 50.00 - 18.42.1962.4 GRAVEN, DEL 92.24 76.82 15.42 09/14/2004 60.00 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent / CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List. council ", Page: 5 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05. 2004 06:36pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquentBalance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/20/2004 07/20/2004 06/20/2004 Dale Amount 15.21.1556.2 GREER. RANDY 66.72 30.42 36.30 07/30/2004 37.28 - 8.06.1554.2 GRIMSHAW, INDA 59.45 41.52 17.93 15.21.1734.2 GROAT, STEPHANiE 127.20 70.64 56.56 09/1 0/2004 50.00 - 8.08.0246.2 GUN, JERMEY & VELDHOUSE, ( 85.42 46.42 39.00 07/28/2004 40.00 - 15.21.0462.3 GUNNARSON, HOWARD & Run 90.42 69.72 20.70 10/0512004 50.00 - 8.15.0150.1 HALLMARK HOMES 20.00 20.00 14.19.6596.1 HAM, RUSSELL M. 141.12 78.18 62.94 08109/2004 109.22 - 17.34.2732.1 HAMIL TON, LLOYD 85.22 44.08 41.14 09/07/2004 43.10 - 14.14.3520.2 HAMMON. GEORGE & SHARON 104.86 56.62 48.24 08/2612004 54.12 - 8.08.1282.2 HAMMON, LYLE & PAMELA 91.46 49.92 41.54 08/1912004 106.02 - 14.14.3640.2 HANSEN, ROBERT & MARY 74.70 48.86 25.84 07126/2004 65.00 - 17.34.0841.5 HARDY, MICHAEL 178.60 74.30 104.30 07/19/2004 274.26 - 17.33.2368.2 HARNECK, KARl 77.70 37.38 40.32 08/02/2004 77.42. 16.32.1170.2 HARRIS, JR. , CHARLES EDWAF 96.28 46.52 49.76 08/1712004 53.00 - 15.21.2090.2 HARRIS, WiLLIAM 153.12 36.14 76.92 40.06 08/06/2004 71.30 - 15.21.1786.1 HART, DOUGLAS & DONNA 68.42 49.89 18.53 08/31/2004 120.00 - 14.19.1106.3 HARVEY, BARBARA & CLAIR 93.72 46.86 46.86 08117/2004 83.26 - 15.22.2102.3 HARWOOD, WILLIAM & EMA 92.60 48.40 44.20 09/0212004 65.00 - 15.21.0182.3 HARWOOD, WILLIAM AND EMM, 166.56 55.52 41.80 69.24 06/30/2004 64.34 - 17.34.3234.2 HATCH, GARY 102.52 53.22 49.30 08/17/2004 128.98 - 15.22.1202.6 HATFIELD, TED 162.19 78.46 83.36 .37 09/08/2004 89.01 - 18.42.2366.1 HAWK, FRANCIS 96.96 49.46 47.50 08126/2004 49.46 - 15.21.0480.1 HAYES, LOREN 84.38 43.66 40.72 09/0112004 44.64 - 15.22.1834.2 HEINTZELMAN, AARON & STEPI 93.86 48.40 45.46 " 09/07/2004 45.46 - 17.33.4246.1 HELFERICH, ROGER 64.66 32.64 32.02 09/0712004 65.00 - 16.31.0828.4 HELTON, DEWEY & LISA 157.24 64.90 92.34 09/0712004 89.40 - 15.21.0494.2 HENDRIX, JANIE 79.02 40.00 39.02 09/07/2004 39.02- 15.22.2526.2 HERBERT, WILLIAM III 114.26 75.46 38.80 09/08/2004 75.00 . 18.42.1862.2 HEWLETT. WILLIAM D 98.11 80.18 17.93 14.14.1050.1 HIGH DESERT 121.38 66.26 55.12 07/1212004 56.56 - 14.14.3474.1 HILL, MIKE 70.72 38.08 32.64 08/0312004 35.56 - 6.06.1326.4 HIXSON, CRAIG & AMY 80.D4 43.23 36.81 08/2712004 51.51 - 18.42.2714.4 HOLLADAY, ANTHONY & SUSAl\ 149.70 75.34 74.36 08/24/2004 92.40 . 16.32.1456.1 HOLLINGSHEAD, BRETT 137.12 81.60 55.52 09/08/2004 104.40 . 14.19.0354.2 HOLLOWAY, JENNIFER & TAD 71.98 37.24 34.74 08125/2004 37.68 . 15.21.1928.2 HOLMES, MICHAEL & LAURIE 158.38 92.66 65.72 08/09/2004 160.00 . 16.31.3056.2 HOME BUYERS GROUP LLC 133.44 39.58 42.52 51.34 07/06/2004 54.28 . 10.10.2028.1 HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE 16.61 13.13 3.48 10.10.2164.2 HOOGLAND, CRAIG & KAREN 93.90 58.74 35.16 08/1112004 57.72 - 15.21.0536.1 HOOK, JAMES & CRYSTAL 134.12 65.40 68.72 09/07/2004 66.00 - 14.20.1556.1 HOOVER, L YND 186.26 103.42 82.84 08/13/2004 165.19- 14.20.0454.1 HOWELL, DONALD 66.62 36.14 30.48 09107/2004 35.00 - 15.21.1144.2 HOWELL, MINDY 194.80 91.52 103.28 08124/2004 114.06 - 18.42.1860.3 HUFFAKER, ROBERT 120.08 56.40 63.68 09107/2004 85.00 - 18.42.1840.3 HUGUES, THADDEUS & HEATH! 56.08 28.88 27.20 08/25/2004 30.00 - 18.31.3648.2 HUMPHREY, MARIE & DAVID 156.58 76.82 79.76 09/08/2004 141.82. 16.31.3298.1 HUSON, DAVID SR 71.32 42.94 28.38 14.20.2054.1 HUTH, FREDRICK C. 143.06 136.30 6.76 09/30/2004 75.00 - 15.22.1638.2 IRONS. TERRY 67.22 65.52 1.70 08/31/2004 37.06 . 3.03.5008.2 IVIE, RONALD JR & HOLLY 62.73 48.38 14.35 10.10.2346.2 JACOBSEN, JON & KATHY 95.24 53.28 41.96 07/30/2004 49.35 - 17.33.0408.1 JAMES COURT APTS 374.90 198.23 176.67 08/04/2004 213.91 - 17.33.0380.1 JAMES COURT APTS 173.68 88.31 85.37 08/04/2004 90.27 - 17.33.0386.1 JAMES COURT APTS 156.66 81.27 75.39 08/04/2004 83.23 - 17.33.0388.1 JAMES COURT APTS 71.18 40.57 30.61 08/04/2004 43.51 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent { CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council Page: 6 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:36pm Current Period: 10105/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Las! Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/20/2004 07/20/2004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 17.33.0390.1 JAMES COURT APTS 260.12 142.31 117.81 08/04/2004 158.97 . 17.33.0396.1 JAMES COURT APTS 78.66 45.97 32.69 08/04/2004 15.24 - 17.33.0400.1 JAMES COURT APTS 145.88 74.41 71.47 0810412004 80.29 - 17.33.0394.1 JAMES COURT APTS 100.44 50.11 49.73 08/04/2004 50.71 - 17.33.0366.1 JAMES COURT APTS 489.26 229.93 259.33 08104/2004 306.37 - 17.33.0374.1 JAMES COURT APTS 118.74 63.29 55.45 08/04/2004 60.35 - 17.33.0370.1 JAMES COURT APTS 134.44 69.67 64.77 08/04/2004 69.67 - 17.33.0358.1 JAMES COURT APTS 1,301.08 616.16 676.92 8.00 08/0412004 749.55 - 17.33.0376.1 JAMES COURT APTS 107.30 54.63 52.67 08/04/2004 55.61 - 17.33.0362.1 JAMES COURT APTS 160.92 82.91 78.01 06104/2004 79.97 - 17.33.0382.1 JAMES COURT APTS 144.24 74.57 69.67 08/04/2004 72.61 - 16.32.0936.1 JARDINE, MICHAEL 60.39 57.00 3.39 10/05/2004 65.00 - 18.42.1902.3 JENKINS, LARRY & JEAN 70.40 17.60 17.60 17.60 17.60 14.19.1630.2 JENKINS, LEROY 97.98 48.50 49.48 09/0712004 101.90 - 13.13.9102.3 JENSEN, SCOTT & REBECCA 153.14 37.06 37.06 40.00 39.02 15.21.2830.1 JESSEE, KEVIN 57.86 47.84 10.02 09108/2004 55.00 . 18.42.1800.2 JEWELEE, MICHAEL 77.06 37.06 40.00 17.34.2106.2 JLC PROPERTIES LLC 106.16 54.04 52.12 09/07/2004 110.00 - 18.42.2482.1 JOHNSON, BRYON & MARYLEN 65.00 35.98 29.02 09/0212004 44.80 - 16.32.0616.2 JOHNSON, CONNIE JO 285.42 252.70 32.72 09/07/2004 40.00 . 18.42.0374.3 JOHNSON, DORTHY & REX 279.98 '94.80 90.48 82.64 12.06 10/05/2004 50.00 . 16.32.1570.3 JOHNSON, JACOB & BAIRD, NIC 85.22 39.18 46.04 08125/2004 38.20 . 18.42.2466.2 JOHNSON, KELLY 64.98 62.60 2.38 '09/08/2004 58.26. 15.21.0080.2 JOHNSON, MARC 189.38 128.80 60.58 09/08/2004 67.44 . 17 .33.3600.1 JOHNSON, MICHAEL 75.02 42.12 32.90 07/30/2004 72.90 . 15.21.0124.2 JOHNSON, RICK & TRACiE 82.42 41.70 40.72 08/30/2004 46.60 - 14.19.0098.1 JOHNSON, SAMUEL 69.34 35.16 34.18 08/2612004 35.16 - 15.22.0330.1 JONES, ELDON & LORI 153.98 79.44 . 74.54 09/14/2004. 85.32 - 16.32.1674.1 JONES, M JAY 64.30 31.66 32.64 09114/2004 32.64 - 14.20.1988.1 JONES, SYLVIA 366.16 185.04 181.12 09/07/2004 . 169.36 - 8.08.1088.2 JONES, TRAVIS & LAURA 144.76 76.08 68.68 09/07/2004 53.00 - 10.20.0314.2 JORGENSEN, TOM & PATTY 103.08 58.18 44.90 08/10/2004 32.12- 16.32.0522.2 JUHASZ, DON C. 87.58 53.40 34.18 09/07/2004 70.00 - 15.21.0530.2 JUSTIN, TRACY 70.38 35.16 35.22 09/1512004 37.00 - 15.21.0028.2 KEENEY, DONLAN & ELiSABETl- 84.74 40.88 37.94 5.92 08/19/2004 80.00 - 15.21.1826.1 KEITHLEY, ROBERT 112.48 53.30 59.18 08/1612004 61.14- 14.19.0176.1 KELLER, HARRY 68.24 37.82 30.42 08103/2004 31.40 - 17.34.3190.1 KELLEY, SCOTT 118.92 36.80 41.70 40.42 07121/2004 42.00 - 18.42.1810.2 KESTER,ROBERT 91.32 43.66 44.64 3.02 09113/2004 93.20 . 15.22.0184.1 KING, KRISTY 77.84 40.88 36.96 08/25/2004 37.94. 17.33.4348.1 KINGSTON, CHARLES 229.46 66.46 74.30 88.02 .68 09/0212004 162.32 . 14.20.0428.4 KIRSCHNER, JOHN & MARIL Y 80.00 39.02 40.98 08/10/2004 42.94 . 3.90.0050.2 KNIGHTON, PAUL & NICOLE 66.31 48.38 17.93 17.34.3290.2 KOCH, JOSEPH & VILMA 156.44 76.26 80.18 08/1012004 102.72. 3.03.5296.1 KOLE CROFTS 75.92 29.58 40.16 6.18 06/24/2004 30.00 . 13.13.1028.3 KONICKE, DOUGLAS & SCHELlI 96.80 53.28 43.52 08/24/2004 44.00 - 15.22.2322.2 KOVIAK, JEFFREY & KATI 70.52 56.24 14.26 08106/2004 91.76- 16.32.1364.3 KRAHN, KELLY 34.98 34.18 .80 09114/2004 33.00 - 14.19.6642.1 KRENZ,ROY 152.12 39.46 36.96 38.92 36.78 07108/2004 70.00 - 16.32.0512.2 KRUSE, BRENDA 56.12 26.10 30.02 09/07/2004 44.50 - 18.42.4056.1 LAMOREAUX, KIM 173.28 92.46 80.62 09/09/2004 80.00 - 15.21.1112.3 LANDEN, LAURA A 54.68 43.92 10.76 14.20.0208.2 LANGEVIN, MICHAEL & DARCIE 98.76 34.34 32.38 32.04 07/3012004 70.00 - 15.21.3018.1 LARSON, GORDON 82.26 44.64 37.62 09/0112004 40.00 - 17.33.0236.1 LARSON, MARAL YN 39.66 19.83 19.83 08/06/2004 20.81 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN ( Delinquent Account List- council ( Page: 7 " " Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:37pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/20/2004 07/2012004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 15.21.0456.2 LASLEY, EGAN & ANN 94.84 49.38 45.46 09/0712004 52.32 - 8.08.5064.2 LAWHORN, JASON & WENDY 103.22 55.80 47.42 09/02/2004 50.36 - 10.10.2322.2 LAYNE, DOUGLAS 91.22 50.34 40.88 08/10/2004 85.00 - 13.13.9078.2 LEBEAU, CRAIG & KELCEE 72.16 40.76 31.40 08109/2004 67.70 - 14.20.1986.3 LEDO, CHRISTOPHER & GLAYD 155.08 62.12 92.96 09/13/2004 100.00 - 11.11.5000.2 LEIGHTON, RHONDA 108.12 63.64 44.48 09/14/2004 43.50 - 6.06.2020.2 LEITER, JOHN & CANDICE 72.63 42.41 29.13 1.09 07/07/2004 124.34 - 18.43.0370.2 LEMAR, RICK & MELISSA 83.40 41.70 41.70 09/08/2004 87.32 - 18.42.2736.1 LENAGHEN, CHRIS 58.62 40.22 18.40 09/15/2004 40.00 . 14.19.1592.2 LEONARD, LESLIE 51.22 26.10 25.12 0910112004 25.12 - 17.34.1074.1 LEWIS, LANNY 90.84 57.38 33.46 08/02/2004 74.76 - 14.19.1578.2 LEWIS-PRATER, S. JUDY 52.86 26.92 25.94 08/10/2004 26.92 - 6.06.9086.2 LIN, EUGENE 62.06 35.71 26.35 0810212004 59.56 - 16.31.1002.3 L1NDGREEN, NATHANAEL & HE! 116.12 43.50 42.52 30.10 08/31/2004 75.00 - 17.33.3656.1 LINDSAY, LAURA 64.30 31.66 32.64 08/1212004 31.66 - 17.34.1978.2 LOFTIS, JASON B 185.06 65.48 92.54 27.04 08/06/2004 100.00 . 15.22.1562.2 LOGAN, JENNIFER 108.25 93.90 14.35 15.21.3134.1 LOVE, JAMES & ELIZABETH 154.16 79.04 75.12 09107/2004 81.00 . 17.33.2706.1. LOVELAND, JEREMY 74.27 31.82 42.45 08/18/2004 72.00 - 16.32.0510.2. LOYD, WOODY & JOY 77.84 38.92 38.92 09/07/2004 78.82 - 15.22.1724.1 MACHADO, DAVID 112.22 34.92 54.14 23.16 07/21/2004 ' 93.82 - 10.10.2074.2 MACKAY, DAN 79.62 66.56 13.04 08/03/2004 . 100.00 - 6.06.9658.2' MAl, CURTIS 36.56 20.51 16.05 06/31/2004, 56.97 - 6.06.9818.2 MANDEL, KEITH 63.87 20.67 14.25 28.95 07/06/2004 27.97 - 18.42.3740.2 MANN, JOSH 68.88 36.40 32.48 09/0712004 43.26 - 18.42.2332.1 MARIN, JOSE 120.32 67.02 53.30 08/30/2004 103.66 - 17.34.1472.1 MARKHAM,RON 117.98 44.48 73.50 08/30/2004 48.40 - 7.40.0180.1 MARTIN. ERNEST 58.24 22.06 18.58 17.60 0710212004 17.60 - 13.13.4006.2 MARTIN, MICHAEL 110.74 61.52 49.22 08/10/2004 49.22 . 15.21.2820.3 MARTINA, DAVID 118.30 52.00 66.30 09/17/2004 60.00. 14.19.0186.1 MATTHEWS, JERRY 76.74 41.58 35.16 0810512004 70.32 . 15.15.0005.2 MAUZY. JEFFREY & TI FFAN I 76.20 36.14 40.06 08/27/2004 70.80 . 14.20.1948.1 MCARTHUR, MARIA 153.50 100.76 52.74 08/1212004 64.50 . 18.42.0440.7 MCCLOUD. RUTH 70.84 33.46 37.38 07128/2004 38.36 . 16.32.0230.1 MCFADDEN, LEONARD 148.32 72.20 76.12 08/23/2004 78.10 - 14.20.1326.5 MCGEE, RICHARD & SHARILEE 66.52 35.16 31.36 08/03/2004 72.16 - 16.31.0822.1 MCKAY, JOHN 95.34 41.30 54.04 09/07/2004 61.88 - 16.32.0454.3 MCLEAN, JACK & BOB 194.96 91.46 97.34 6.16 09/07/2004 100.00 - 17.34.0448.1 MCMURDIE, PAUL 140.15 83.94 56.21 08/25/2004 73.16 . 14.14.3574.2 MCNERNEY, ELLEN 105.02 55.96 49.06 08125/2004 67.00 . 16.31.0668.4 MEADE, LENA 91.74 41.46 50.28 09/07/2004 90.76 - 17.34.0966.2 MEHOLCHICK, VICKY 213.14 86.48 126.66 08/0212004 223.92 - 13.13.8834.2 MELDRUM, JEREMY & COURTN 103.58 56.46 47.12 08/03/2004 52.98 - 14.19.6604.1 MELTON, MARSHALL 89.36 50.34 39.02 08/03/2004 46.86 - 16.32.0948.1 MERIDIAN FOURSQUARE CHUJ; 104.15 42.03 62.12 10/01/2004 96.47 - 18.43.0428.2 MERTES, JEFFREY P. 92.42 46.70 45.72 09/13/2004 97.32 - 18.42.3000.2 MESKE, MICHAEL & PETERS, D, 89.28 43.66 45.62 08103/2004 86.34 - 16.31.0494.2 MESZAROS,LlLLI 86.12 48.40 37.72 09/07/2004 100.00 - 14.19.1708.2 MICHAS, JAMES 87.06 55.10 31.96 08/03/2004 70.78 - 15.22.2618.2 MILICH, MARK & KIM 100.68 80.36 20.32 09/0812004 95.26 - 17.34.1938.3 MILLER, DON 95.04 78.32 16.72 09/08/2004 38.46 . 9.09.0130.2 MILLER, JAMES 148.00 49.04 49.48 49.48 07/02/2004 101.90. 9.09.0288.2 MILLER, JAMES 116.36 70.90 45.46 08113/2004 41.96- 15.22.1440.1 MILLER, JOSEPH 132.42 93.50 38.92 09/07/2004 60.00 . 16.31.0568.2 MILLER. NEIL 88.14 36.56 51.58 09/08/2004 48.00 . ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent , ( CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List. council \ '. Page; B Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:37pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmounlDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/20/2004 07/20/2004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 17.34.1964.2 MILLER. RICKEY 90.12 43.10 47.02 09/01/2004 10.78 - 6.08.0304.2 MILLS, JOHN 143.10 79.66 63.44 09/0712004 61.48 - 17.33.0302.2 MOMB, PEGGY 80.00 40.00 40.00 08/03/2004 36.92 - 15.15.0716.2 MONCUR, KERRY T 21.96 40.98 40.00 40.98 0710212004 42.94 - 18.42.1836.3 MONROE, BUD 68.06 59.52 8.54 09121/2004 50.00 - 15.22.1414.3 MOORE, ANNABELLE 50.40 35.64 14.76 08/17/2004 100.00 - 17.33.2700.2 MORGAN, HEATHER 72.80 36.40 36.40 09/07/2004 36.40 . 13.13.0006.4 MORGAN, SKY & MADEL YNN 91.92 44.76 47.16 08/10/2004 48.14 - 14.19.1300.2 MORRIS, LAURA 29.97 4.85 25.12 05128/2004 26.10 - 15.21.2222.1 MORRISON, ROBERT & CORINf\ 70.00 35.98 34.02 08/03/2004 87.80 . 18.42.1978.1 MORSE, DAVID & SHELLEY 84.02 49.14 34.88 08/1012004 50.00 - 3.03.5238.2 MUNOZ, ROBERT& MICHELLE 84.72 33.50 25.12 26.10 07/21/2004 52.20 - 14.19.6506.2 MUSICK, LYLE 67.70 55.80 11.90 09/0212004 80.00 - 9.92.7022.2 NARDI, ANGELA 69.47 50.34 19.13 16.32.1606.2 NASIATKA, JEFFREY 60.50 38.36 22.14 09/07/2004 50.00 - 15.21.2904.2 NAULT, TIM & MICHELLE 122.26 54.76 67.50 09/02/2004 104.62 - 8.08.1070.1 NEIDER, KYLEE & MENDI 85.24 46.32 38.92 09/17/2004 39.90 - 14.19.0046.2 NEITZELL , JAMES & HEATHER 133.34 95.50 37.84 06106/2004 137.98 - 16.31.0508.2 NELSON JOHN H. 60.84 31.98 28.86 09/08/2004 35.90 - 8.15.0056.1 NEWELL, JACQUELINE 110.50 64.62 45.68 08/31/2004 47.68 - 17.34.3204.2 NICHOLSON, MARLENE 111.00 52.56 58.44 07/30/2004 115.56 - 8.08.0140.1. NIELSEN, KIRT 75.28 72.22 3.06 09/14/2004 50.00 - 16.31.0726.1 . NITZ, JASON 4B.48 39,66 8.82 08/26/2004 .95.98 - 15.21.0498.1 NOLAND, SHAWN 84.38 42.68 41.70 08/25/2004 42.68 - 16.31.2198.2 NORRIS, JOSHUA & COREY 81.42 38.26 43.16 09/07/2004 43.16 - 17.33.0288.1 NORTHNESS, RITA 52.86 26.92 25.94 08/0312004 25.94 - 17.33.4262.4 NYE, SHANE & JENNIFER 81.30 41.14 40.16 07/0212004 39.18 - 9.09.0156.1 O.P.M. ENTERPRISES 85.14 47.30 37.84 09107/2004 40.00 - 14.20.0126.2 O'BANION, BRIAN & TIFFANY 369.10 190.92 178.18 09107/2004 206.60 . 16.32.0560.1 O'DELL, LAURA K. 87.16 42.60 44.56 08/1112004 66.18 - 17.46.0102.1 OFFICE JET 6.00 5.44 .56 14.20.1396.1 OGLESBEE, DAVID & MARITA 115.92 57.96 57.96 08/30/2004 109.04 - 13.13.6084.1 ONSITE LLC 63.99 24.84 21.36 14.31 3.48 10.20.0240.1 ONSITE LLC 29.51 23.01 3.48 3.02 13.13.6046.1 ONSITE LLC 25.75 19.25 3.48 3.02 10.20.0182.1 ONSITE LLC 25.75 19.25 3.48 3.02 13.13.2080.3 OSBORN, CHRISTOPHER 100.28 55.80 44.48 08/05/2004 90.92 - 14.19.6562.1 OSBURN, GARY & KELLY 98.30 66.08 32.22 08/09/2004 32.22 - 18.42.2258.2 OVERDEVEST,ROBERT 232.12 118.02 114.10 09/09/2004 157.20 - 15.21.1432.2 OWSLEY, RICK & TERI 49.26 49.22 .04 09/15/2004 48.00 - 14.20.1718.4 PACKHAM, NOLAN 35.70 18.83 16.87 08/03/2004 30.84 - 9.09.0060.2 PAGE, RENEE JEAN 88.70 48.54 40.16 08/1012004 43.10 - 14.20.1428.1 PALMER, RICHARD L. 35.18 35.16 .02 09/07/2004 34.16 - 10.10.0030.1 PARKE, KIRBY & MICHELLE 98.18 55.24 42.94 08/03/2004 88.82 - 15.15.0524.1 PATTEE, RICHARD & ROSIE 105.68 53.96 51.72 09108/2004 53.00 - 8.08.1374.2 PATTEN, MILA 111.06 58.74 46.44 5.88 09114/2004 37.06 - 16.32.1626.2 PAYNE, LARRY & KRISTY 98.44 50.20 48.24 09/01/2004 50.20 - 16.31.0168.3 PENA, DAVID 41.74 21.36 20.38 08/2412004 25.28 - 15.21.2194.3 PETERSON, LLOYD & DAWN 43.00 42.02 .98 09/16/2004 43.00 - 16.32.0690.2 PETTERSON,KENNETH 156.24 43.26 64.82 48.16 07/30/2004 89.15 - 18.42.1180.2 PETTIT, MATTHEW W 80.20 18.58 22.50 20.54 18.58 06/23/2004 21 .52 - 16.32.0490.4 PFAFF, CHRISTOPHER & KRIST 78.02 36.56 41.46 09/07/2004 86.84 - 3.03.5234.1 PHIL HORTON 88.92 60.04 28.88 07/30/2004 17.60 - 18.42.1842.1 PHILLIPS, ANIKA 64.30 32.64 31.66 08/26/2004 66.26 - 15.21,3022.3 PHILLIPS, SCOTT & MELANIE 229.14 111.14 118.00 08/24/2004 78.80 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ".r"-..... ! CITY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council \ Page: 9 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:38pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cusl No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/20/2004 07/20/2004 06120/2004 Date Amount 18.42.1160.1 PIETRZAK, JOHN 104.00 52.98 51.02 09/08/2004 52.00 - 8.08.0020.1 PIKE, KELLY & SHANNON 114.46 86.60 27.86 08/11/2004 51.44 - 13.13.6036.1 PINNACLE BUILDING CO, INC 49.14 31.54 17.60 08/06/2004 21.36 - 16.32.1590.1 PISCHEL, DEBORAH 82.58 46.70 35.88 09/07/2004 55.00 - 15.21.1086.2 PITCHER, MIKE& CHRISTA 230.40 89.74 110.92 29.74 09/17/2004 60.00 - 15.22.1344.1 PLOTT, JOHN 99.12 61.80 37.32 09/07/2004 50.00 - 9.09.9112.2 PORTER, DAVID & SHERRI 85.44 44.46 40.98 08/25/2004 32.12- 15.21.2604.1 PORTER,RODNEY 110.76 63.92 46.84 09107/2004 100.00 - 17.33.2574.2 PORTER, SIDNEY 97.66 39.18 58.48 09/07/2004 60.00 - 15.21.0078.1 POTRIOGE, GAIL 92.22 46.60 45.62 09/0712004 47.58 - 15.21.3062.1 POWELL, GREG & CATHERINE 261.84 138.76 123.08 09/0812004 97.10 - 13.13.9104.2 PRESSLEY, CHRISTOPHER & TJ 113.04 55.32 57.72 08/06/2004 58.70 . 10.10.0068.2 PRIESS, JENNIFER 119.56 61.52 58.04 09/0212004 56.08. 17.34.3330.1 PRITlKEN, ROGER & TERESE 125.72 58.94 66.78 08/26/2004 59.92 - 18.42.2112.2 PROUTY, CLAYTON 108.72 60.24 48.48 09/0212004 89.12 - 17.33.2602.2 PRYOR, JUNE 37.78 37.38 .40 10/05/2004 36.00 - 17.33.2732.2 PRYOR, KELSEY 89.48 43.76 45.72 09/10/2004 70.30 - 16.31.3022.5 PURSIFULL, KEITH & CHEREE 62.56 62.54 .02 09/08/2004 49.35 - 17.34.1172.1 QUARNBERG, CARL & DOROTH 167.58 78.40 89.18 09/08/2004 93.10 - 3.03.5214.1 RANDOLPH, ERNIE & SANDEE 93.28 50.34 42.94 08/1212004 40.98 - 6.06.9124.2 RANSOM. JENNIFER 66.64 35.55 31.09 08/27/2004 29.13 - 16.16.3001.1 RATCLIFFE INVESTMENTS 20.88 20.88 16.32.1288.3 RAWLINSON, ALlSA 62.34 '.31.66 30.68 09101/2004 . 63.32 - 15.22.2280.2 . REAVIS, JEFFREY 228.36 120.55 107.81 09/07/2004 89.19 - 16.31.0840.2 REED,CAROLYN 81.96 40.00 41.96 09/0212004 34.30- 15.21.0118.2 REIS, DAVID 61.82 31.40 30.42 08/10/2004 31.40 . 15.21.2918.1 REYES, DAVID 126.06 67.18 58.88 09/07/2004 75.00 . 15.15.0100.1 REYNA, ANTHONY & M. 86.20 42.12 44.08 07/29/2004 47.02- 18.42.2620.1 REYNOLDS, PATRICK T 79.82 64.18 15.64 09/10/2004 75.00 - 17.33.3712.1 RHYMER, RICK 86.72 43.92 42.80 08/03/2004 45.00 - 10.10.0116.2 RICE, DONALD & JULIE 94.64 59.32 35.32 09/01/2004 45.00 - 16.31.2286.3 RICH, CORY 136.00 63.10 72.90 09/0712004 75.84 - 15.21.1916.4 RICHARDS, JAMES 119.20 54.70 64.50 08/1012004 62.54 - 15.22.0880.1 RIETH, KEVIN F. 206.67 108.52 98.15 09/07/2004 100.00 - 14.20.0030.1 RIGBY GERALDINE 141.86 54.76 87.10 08111/2004 70.44 - 17.34.1612.1 RIGENHAGEN, MONTY & KIMBE 136.34 51.92 84.42 09/07/2004 60.00 - 18.42.0310.3 RINKE, JOE & SMITH, RANDALL 86.62 84.94 1.68 10/04/2004 50.00 . 15.21.0228.2 ROAM, JENNIFER 79.02 39.02 40.00 08/03/2004 32.34 - 14.14,3718.2 ROBERSON, LEE & TAUNI 85.44 46.16 39.28 07/28/2004 81.96 - 17.33.0248.3 ROBERT, HAROLD 44.56 22.77 21.79 08/09/2004 19.83 - 18.31.3048.2 ROBERTS,HARLAN 84.88 46.36 38.52 07129/2004 38.52 - 15.15.0636.4 ROBINSON, RICH 76.32 46.86 29.46 14.14.4450.2 ROGERS, JACK & DENISE 79.68 43.54 36.14 08/06/2004 76.20 - 14.19.7130.5 ROMANS, NICK 46.70 42.56 4.14 09/09/2004 32.00 - 15.15.0040.3 ROWLEY, RICHARD 78.04 37.06 40.98 09/07/2004 108.82 - 17.33.0128.1 ROYAL DYNASTY 518.11 6.69 263.23 248.19 06/08/2004 447.50 - 15.22.0914.1 RUCKER, JEAN 100.38 49.70 50.68 08/31/2004 105.82 - 15.21.0112.2 RUMMLER, MATHEW 83.40 42.68 40.72 08/06/2004 79.02 - 13.13.6060.1 RUNGE, DUNCAN 158.76 59.16 78.82 20.78 08104/2004 100.00 . 18.42.2310.2 SABIN, NEAL & ELAINE 51.51 31.50 20.01 14.19.7156.1 SALAZAR, DANIEL 96.98 38.24 28.88 29.86 08/03/2004 59.72 - 14.20.3032.2 SALLEE, BRET & DEBBIE 51.34 10.52 40.82 08/03/2004 76.08 - 15.21.3292.2 SALZMAN, KIM & BRIAN 156.58 80.74 75.84 07/27/2004 127.18 - 14.14.5043.3 SARCO,BETTY 69.47 50.34 19.13 14.19.0308.3 SASSER, GALE & SHERRY 67.82 41.52 26.30 ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent , ( CITY OF MERIDIAN I; Delinquent Account List. council Page: 10 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:38pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/2012004 07/2012004 06120/2004 Date Amount 3.03.5264.1 SAWTOOTH HOMES INC 43.14 21.08 17.60 4.46 08/3012004 35.20 - 16.31.3598.2 SCHEUFFELE, TERRY & MICHEl 92.42 46.70 45.72 08/10/2004 46.70 - 17.34.2122.1 SCHMIDT, GLEN 133.24 58.78 74.46 09/07/2004 121.44 - 17.33.2306.1 SCHNEIDER, ROBERT & MARY 105.28 35.42 34.44 35.42 08/0212004 65.42- 17.34.2144.2 SCHRANK, THOMAS 161.82 65.98 95.38 .46 09/07/2004 118.00 - 3.03.5150.1 SCHROEDER ENT 22.73 19.25 3.48 08/13/2004 3.02 - 15.21.1760.2 SCHUBERT, DAVID & VICKY 192.65 85.08 82.14 25.43 17.33.2584.2 SCHULER, ROBERT & JAMIE 82.76 43.92 38.84 09107/2004 42.00 - 16.31.3018.2 SCHUSTER, FORREST & DEBBII 174.98 72.34 68.42 34.22 08/31/2004 100.00 - 15.22.1636.4 SCOTT, CHUCK & TIFFANY 208.24 67.16 66.62 74.46 07/07/2004 77.40 - 13.13.4028.2 SHAKE, KENNETH & CARRIE 100.80 56.06 44.74 09/08/2004 46.70 - 18.42.3042.1 SHAMIM, YAMIR 94.18 47.58 46.60 09/07/2004 47.58 - 14.20.3054.2 SHARP, LIZABETH 8,374.16 8,360.54 13.62 15.22.1316.2 SHAW, OWEN & CHRISTINA 105.32 102.56 2.76 09/27/2004 100.00 - 6.06.2026.2 SHEA, LUKE & ROBYN 85.40 45.91 39.49 09/0712004 32.07 - 18.42.2526.1 SHEL TRON, ROGER 127.50 65.22 62.28 09/15/2004 78.94 - 15,21.0208.1 SILSBY, TERRY 194.48 79.42 60.80 54.26 08/25/2004 120.00 - 15.21.2730.1 SILVESTRI, PAUL & SHANA 173.02 96.12 76.90 09108/2004 65.48 - 10.10.1106.2 SIMMONS, JON & JANA 93.42 51.06 42.36 09/01/2004 43.00 - 17.34.1184.2 SIMONDS, ADAM & RUTH 78.68 41.30 37.38 08/0312004 75.74 - 15.21.2836.2 SINGLETON, RODNEY 214.82 106.92 107.90 09/08/2004 86.72 - 17.34.0822.1 SITZLAR, RON & GAY 189.08 84.86 59.76 44.46 09/08/2004 30.00 - 17.33.3732.2 SIZEMORE, ALAN 86.86 42.94 43.92 . 08/26/2004 41.96 - 16.32.0962.2 SLUDER, MELISSA 78.84 78.54 .30 09129/2004 67.46 - 8.06.1558.2 SMITH, COREY & JENNIFER 60.43 42.50 17.93 15.21.2668.1 SMITH, LISA 69.30 55.58 13.72 08/2712004 57.54 - 18.42.3044.2 SMITH, MONTE 63.92 43.92 40.00 07/2912004 105.66 - 15.21.2208.2 SMITH, RONALD & LINDA 124.12 57.16 66.96 08/0212004 .58.26 - 17.33.2296.1 SMITH, RONALD & MELISSA 66.48 65.50 .98 08/25/2004 130.02 - 15.22.0908.1 SMITH, SCOTT 119.32 55.74 63.58 08/17/2004 58.68 - 6.06.1334.2 SONNEMAN, DAVID 57.93 48.95 8.98 . 08/25/2004 80.00 - 10.10.0616.1 SORENSON CONSTRUCTION 69.50 54.98 14.52 07/16/2004 77.56- 15.22.2342.2 SPANBAUER, TODD & LISA 120.26 71.70 48.56 09/0812004 96.14 - 13.13.8550.2 SPARKS, JUSTIN & JENNIFER 102.42 55.96 46.46 09/08/2004 47.00 - 8.08.0170.2 SPIWAK, RAND & SALLY 92.44 70.90 21.54 1 0/05/2004 64.48 - 14.20,1228.1 ST. ALPHONSUS MEDICAL CEN' 140.66 73.05 67.61 09101/2004 67.61 - 18.42.4266.2 STEGMANN, MIKE & JENNIFER 47.64 47.42 .22 09121/2004 57.00 - 16.32.0792.2 STEPHANS, LEANN 111.68 43.82 67.86 08/30/2004 60.00 - 16.31.1060.1 STRONG, EARNEST 60.36 20.12 20.12 20.12 OS/26/2004 286.86 - 17.34.2772.1 SUNDE, PAMELA M 51.22 26.10 25.12 07/27/2004 26.10. 18.42.1972.2 SWANSON, CORY & CASSANDj:; 118.86 61.88 56.98 08/03/2004 57.96 . 6.06.1914.1 SWANSON, STEVE 38.38 37.51 .87 09/07/2004 92.29 - 8.08.0514.1 TAHOE HOMES 30.67 27.19 3.48 08/17/2004 1.74 - 16.31.2314.2 TEIXEIRA, MICHELLE 116.76 38.10 39.06 39.58 07119/2004 70.00 . 16.32.0546.1 TEWKSBURY, LINDA 79.64 40.80 38.84 08/16/2004 40.80 . 16.31.0798.3 THIEMANN, CHRIS 52.20 50.62 1.58 1 0/05/2004 51.00- 8.85.0040.1 THOMAS & DUNN 89.34 22.06 17.60 17.60 32.08 8.85.0018.1 THOMAS & DUNN 80.85 25.82 17.60 21.36 16.07 16.32.1558.4 THOMPSON,GARY 97.42 46.70 50.62 .10 09/08/2004 93.00 - 13.13.8124.2 THOMPSON, RYAN 128.66 52.70 48.24 27.72 07/26/2004 75.00 - 9.09.0284.2 THOMSEN, DAVY 63.66 61.12 2.54 09101/2004 120.00 - 18.42.2544.2 T1NTSMAN,TODD 120.82 56.00 64.82 07/29/2004 113.82 - 10.10.2104.2 TODD, LESLIE & ANNEMARIE 84.12 45.76 38.36 08/09/2004 37.38 - 18.42.2608.1 TONEY, RICHARD & ROBIN 123.12 60.82 62.30 09/07/2004 76.00 - 15.22.0990.3 TOWNSEND. BRYANT & TANISI- 110.82 53.94 56.88 09/0712004 99.10 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is 10 be sent CITY OF MERIDIAN ( Delinquent Account List- council ( Page; 11 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:38pm Current Period: 10/05/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance Last Pmt Last Pml Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/2012004 07/20/2004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 16.31.0454.2 TRACY, JOL YNN 53.02 48.06 4.96 09/27/2004 75.00 - 9.09.9242.1 TRADEMARK HOMES 81.08 43.80 27.63 7.40 2.25 7.48.0080.1 TRAVCO CONSTRUCTION 52.29 28.76 23.53 08/16/2004 3.48. 7.48.0182.1 TRAVCO CONSTRUCTION 43.42 25.82 17.60 0811612004 17.60 . 15.21.1174.1 TWADDLE, DAVID 157.84 66.86 90.98 09107/2004 67.84- 6.06.1932.3 TWEDE, ROGER & JENNIFER 60.10 31.79 28.31 08106/2004 26.35. 10.20.0044.1 TWIN CREEKS CONSTRUCTION 18.77 14.36 3.48 .93 17.34.0028.2 VALUE, CARRIE 52.75 28.88 23.87 07106/2004 57.87. 17.34.1946.4 VANCE, CHRISTY 207.50 133.88 73.62 09108/2004 1 50.00 . 17.33.2578.1 VERKUYLEN, AD 88.48 46.20 42.28 08/26/2004 87.50 - 16.32.1406.2 VICKERS, BETTY 122.48 59.44 62.38 .66 09107/2004 63.00 - 15.21.2754.3 VICNG 173.70 63.52 110.18 09/01/2004 74.88 - 17.34.1520.1 VICTORY, CHRISTOPHER 91.76 46.86 44.90 08/27/2004 44.90 - 16.32.0656.3 VICTORY, MICHAEL & YUNSUK 89.46 40.32 49.14 09/0212004 38.36 - 17.34.1314.2 VOGEL, JUSTIN & IRENE 149.22 60.40 88.82 08/10/2004 96.30 - 16.31.3556.2 VOGT, STELLA 184.62 60.66 123.96 05125/2004 58.00 - 14.20.0448.1 WADE OLDENBURG 16.98 13.50 3.48 5.08.0094.1 WALDORF & SONS 10.07 7.94 2.13 15.21.0004.2 WALKER FAMILY TRUST 99.70 51.32 48.38 08/10/2004 . 54.26 - 17.33.3682.1 WALLACE, CRYSTAL 102.88 50.46 52.42 09/0712004 54.38 - 17.34.3328.1 WALLIS, EVELYN 102.34 31.50 32.48 38.36 07/0212004 102.35 . 16.32.1306.2 WALSH, DAVID & CARA 90.92 45.46 45.46 09107/2004 57.22 - 15.22.1734.1 WALTERS, J. SCOTT 93.40 48.66 44.74 09/07/2004 . 48.66 - 14.20.0190.1 WARD, LINDA K 105.38 65.96 39.42 09/08/2004 50.00 - 15.21.2240.1 WARD, MIKE 97.30 70.80 26.50 09/07/2004 120.00 - 9.09.0656.1 WARM SPRINGS CONSTRUCTIC 35.12 26.80 4.84 3.48 10.20.0310.1 WARMS SPRINGS CONSTRUCT 11.81 9.90 1.91 18.42.0462.4 WEBB, HENRY & CHERRIE 162.50 56.90 61.80 43.80 09/02/2004 70.00 - 15.21.2192.3 WEBER, THOMAS 107.16 77.16 30.00 09123/2004 122.84 - 18.43.0396.3 WELCH, ROBERT & TIFFANY 285.70 154.12 131.58 09107/2004 94.34 - 18.42.0376.1 WELCH, ROBERT & TIFFANY 99.42. 51.18 48.24 09/07/2004 52.16 - 8.15.0016.1 WESTROCK HOMES 37.84 24.84 9.52 3.48 8.15.0058.1 WESTROCK HOMES 10.22 6.96 3.26 16.32.1264.3 WHEELER, BJ & HORTON, DIAN 105.48 48.82 56.66 08/10/2004 43.67 - 3.03.5816.2 WHITE, JOHN & BRENDA 51.08 41.52 9.56 16.16.3508.2 WHITMIRE, SCOTT & SYNDI 97.24 63.62 33.62 09108/2004 65.28 - 9.09.0266.2 WICKHAM, JAY & TERI 94.26 51.32 42.94 06127/2004 83.92 - 15.21.21 72.3 WILBER, MR ED, & ROSS SISTE 140.74 64.98 75.76 08/0212004 64.98 - 17.34.1544.2 WILLIAMS, CHAD & MARY 99.42 50.20 49.22 08/11/2004 49.22 . 18.18.0020.1 WILLIAMS, WALTER & ROBERTI 65.78 32.89 32.89 08/24/2004 66.76 . 16.32.1252.2 WILLIAMSON, DALE 48.92 23.48 25.44 08/03/2004 117.80- 16.32.1638.2 WILOTH, MARK 73.92 37.94 35.96 07/2612004 102.94 - 14.20.3214.3 WILSON, BRETT & KELLlE 88.42 45.88 42.54 08/0412004 100.00 - 3.90.0064.2 WILSON, LINDA & NATHAN 97.20 60.14 37.06 17.33.0524.1 WINKLE, STUART 345.23 129.77 120.95 94.51 07123/2004 40.16 - 6.06.9270.2 WOLF, TODD 79.20 55.81 23.39 07121/2004 35.00 - 14.14.3006.2 WOOD, DOUGLAS & MELANIE 48.21 44.52 3.69 09/08/2004 35.00 - 14.19.1108.1 WOODS, PATRICIA 74.24 35.16 36.14 2.94 07/28/2004 70.32 - 17.34.1506.2 WOODWARD, ROBERT 91.70 41.44 50.26 09/01/2004 42.32 - 3.03.5132.1 WOOLSTON, GEORGE 48.16 23.04 25.12 08/11/2004 32.30 - 10.10.0502.1 WRIGHT BROTHERS 99.64 72.84 24.36 2.44 10.10.0500.1 WRIGHT BROTHERS 66.37 43.89 19.46 3.02 17.34.1892.2 WRIGHT, GILMAN 98.92 54.36 44.56 08/1 012004 38.68 - 17.33.4250.1 YEAGER, ERIK 92.42 46.70 45.72 08/25/2004 47.68 - 16.31.0764.3 YORK. CLARENCE 95.68 44.90 50.78 08106/2004 53.72 - ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent ( . . CiTY OF MERIDIAN Delinquent Account List- council ( Page: 12 Standard Payment Customers Oct 05, 2004 06:38pm Current Period: 10105/2004 No Delinquent Minimum AmountDelinquent Balance last Pmt Last Pmt Cust No Name Balance Non-Delinq 08/2012004 07120/2004 06/20/2004 Date Amount 17.34.1210.1 YOUNG, JOSEPH 90.46 44.74 45.72 09/1512004 24.74 - 15.21.1038.1 YOUNG, NICK & GLENDA 147.30 68.26 79.04 08/10/2004 81.00 - 16.31.3248.2 YOUNG,REBECCA 103.68 55.02 48.66 09/21/2004 40.00 - 16.32.1602.1 ZAHM,ROBERT 212.10 39.74 40.72 43.66 87.98 05118/2004 43.00 - 6.06.9192.2 ZAHM, TAMMY 30.85 26.07 4.78 08/13/2004 22.00 - 3.03.5750.1 ZAMBEZI GROUP 8.76 6.96 1.80 10.20.0230.2 ZANDSTRA,GARY 67.72 47.40 20.32 17.34.2842.1 ZASPEL, TIMOTHY & DEBRA 108.54 47.90 60.64 0910 1/2004 115.40- 13.13.8482.2 ZEISLOFT, BRIAN & JILL 93.74 52.04 41.70 08116/2004 44.64- Grand Totals: 72,738.04 42,248.18 26,524.25 2,962.50 1,003.11 Report Criteria: Terminated customers not included Customer.Cust No 0" {<} 880000001 Customer. Bill Cycle = 2 ... in Msg column indicates no Notice is to be sent October 1 , 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil MEETING APPLICANT Pinnacle Engineers, inc. AZ 04-015 October 5, 2004 ITEM NO. 18 REQUEST Ordinance - Request for Annexation and zoning of 1+/- acres from RUT to R-8 zones for proposed Secret Garden Subdivision - 2490 North Locust Grove Road AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY AlTORNEY CITY POLlCE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEITLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Ordinance 11\)( D4/ l Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.C. ~ 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 04--.lL!24- PROVIDING FOR A REZONING ORDINANCE An Ordinance of the City of Meridian granting rezoning for land owned by Oliver Cleaver and Debbie A. Cleaver, that is commonly located at the half mile between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road on the East side of Locust Grove Road, Meridian, Idaho, consisting of 12.620 square feet, more or less, with a zoning designation of L-O Limited Office District; and to provide for effect of invalidity; providing that all ordinances and resolutions in conflict are repealed and rescinded; and providing an effective date. Legal Description Physically located at the halfmile between Fairview Avenue and Ustick Road on the East side of Locust Grove Road, Meridian, Idaho. A parcel of land for the purpose of rezoning located in a portion of the SW 1/4 of the NW1I4 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monument marking the NW corner of said Section 5, thence along the West line of said Section 5 SOoo24'25"W a distance of 2237.96 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, Thence leaving said West line N89046'05"E a distance of 122.99 feet to a point; Thence SOoo24'25"W a distance of 103.31 feet to a point; Thence N89035'35"W a distance of 122.98 feet to a point on said West line, from which a brass cap monument making the SW corner of said NW1I4 bears SOoo24'25"W a distance of263.66 feet; Thence along said West line NOoo24'25"E a distance of 101.94 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 12,620 square feet more or less and is subject to all existing rights-of-ways or easements of record or implied. RZ-04-0 A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, City of Meridian, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance shall become effective on the ~ ~ day of t)~6.e,.... , 2004. 11\111111111/11 I1II fl.oIl. fIll '\\\\1 of iVICf?I.^ 1I1I // ,\~..... ~4. 'l ~~' ~ ~~ (/l /~ CJ' 00'f'J'OR.<l~ '.;j; 'l\ C. fM 'd' ~ ~ <.:S' <::)-;. lty 0 . en Ian 2 ~ Mayor and City Council ~ SEAL :: By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk ~ -y: C?; -; vQ. ,05 0 .2 -; '1';\ uSr 1S\ . x-: 2 ...... '"""., ~ .::- First Reading: I tf}- ~- {).f- ///......1//; 00UN-rl . ~\\,\,,">' Adopted after first reading by suspension of th~'Rtile. as lall'owed pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: YES )< NO Second Reading: Third Reading: jpZ:\ Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\Secret Garden\SUMANNEXZONGORD.doc RZ-04-0 ADA COUNTY RECORDER J. DAVID NAVARRO BOISE IDAHO 10/08/04 03:36 PM DEPUTY Bonnie Oberbillig RECORDED - REQUEST OF Meridian City AMOUNT .00 6 11I1111111111111111111I11I11111111111 104129532 CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 04- /1 t) 1- AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT THE OWNERS, OLIVER CLEAVER AND DEBBIE A. CLEAVER, OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE HALF MILE BETWEEN FAIRVIEW A VENUE AND USTICK ROAD ON THE EAST SIDE OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD, MERIDIAN, IDAHO HAVE MADE A WRITTEN REQUEST FOR REZONE OF THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR REAL PROPERTY THAT LIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN FROM R-8 (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) TO L-O (LIMITED OFFICE DISTRICT) AS DEFINED UNDER MERIDIAN CITY CODE SECTION 11-7-2 G REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS ORDERS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ADD SAID REZONING DESIGNATION TO THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. FINDINGS: 1. The owner ofthe following described property has made a written request for a re-zone of the zoning classification for the subject Real Property herein described from R-8 (Medium Density Residential) to L-O (Limited Office) District as defined under Meridian City Code ~ 11-7-2 G; and Physically located at the half mile between F airview Avenue and U stick Road on the east side of Locust Grove Road, Meridian, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: SECRET GARDEN SUBDNISION (L-O) RE-ZONE ORDINANCE PAGE 1 OF4 A parcel of land for the purpose of rezoning located in a portion of the SWl/4 of the NW1I4 of Section 5, Township 3 North, Range I East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monument marking the NW comer of said Section 5, thence along the West line of said Section 5 SOoo24'25"W a distance of 2237.96 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, Thence leaving said West line N89046'05"E a distance of 122.99 feet to a point; Thence S00024'25"W a distance of 103.31 feet to a point; Thence N89035'35"W a distance of 122.98 feet to a point on said W est line, :from which a brass cap monument making the SW comer of said NWl/4 bears SOoo24'25"W a distance of263.66 feet; Thence along said West line NOoo24'25"E a distance of 1 01.94 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Said parcel contains 12,620 square feet more or less and is subject to all existing rights-of-ways or easements of record or implied. 2. The City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council having given notice and conducted all public hearings in accordance with law and having issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law and Decision and Order granting the application for rezone and which conditions and requirements Applicant shall comply; and 3. The real property, which is the subject ofthis ordinance, is legally described in Section 1.1. of this Ordinance. SECTION 2. That the above-described Property be, and the same is herebyre-zoned and designated (L-O) Limited Office District. SECRET GARDEN SUBDIVISION (L-O) RE-ZONE ORDINANCE PAGE 2 OF 4 SECTION 3. That the City Engineer is hereby direct to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps depicting the City of Meridian land use zones in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 4: All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 5~ dayof tlw6~ ,2004. 5"fYROVED BY THE ~~ pF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this -r!J- day of C, Eft-', 2004. Attest: ~~ \\lllilIM;}xor eerd. "\ "II, 1111 """..J. Of MEJ)>/D/"'" " .:'. ~A. /.... /' 0' onpoR..<y):; . Y ~ 2 ~o ~o ~ - ,~ .... - ' - ~ - ~ - - .....-- SECRET GARDEN SUBDIVISION (L-O) RE-ZONE ORDINANCE PAGE 3 OF 4 STATE OF IDAHO, ) ss. County of Ada. ) On this ,5-Yk day of () C- ~ kv- , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY De WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) ".URlII,.., ~~,,, GAR .... ....~ \.0. /) A. #". ..... '"\. ....... ~ Y A "'.. ~ <:, .... ..._~~ -:. ~ (.) .. ..-:. :: 4; G. 01: Afq.,.,. ~ : c~ ~ ~ , * : .." ........ " - c,: : :\ . .. PUB'" · 0 : ..--'-"',.: ,: "" -"0.. .. ,;;::...... , ,'" ~ '~'-oa1il:oO. -<"\ '\.. r.t," 1 -;." C c; \v ~.." ~,:,_ i ~:o;~:'i~C~~1."'!I. ,~~aI4t'-"'--- NOT - LIC FO IDAB? ~ RESIDING AT: '4/1." '.-cJL'--~ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:' :.2 S; 07 jpZ:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 1 5360MlSecret Garden\RZOrdinanceSecret Garden.doc SECRET GARDEN SUBDNISION (L-O) RE-ZONE ORDINANCE PAGE40F4 Ma~ l'l U4 04:4~p Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. I 31 32 .....~.. ~iII"m li."t...) 6~5 i i 208-887-7781 EXHIBIT "Bll ANNEXATION LEGAL 1 i , iD J' ~ I C7l ~ J " ! ~i:::J I M' N I O. I to : 1 C\l: N89'46'05"E 36.00' ,I r-' ~ LQ S'J ~ C\1 o o o Z en t.:l Z - ~ < Pt1 CO I w..O 101 o : ~r en ~ - (f) L.J :"1 <' mF ;31 .., '" ~I tLl8 >:z: 0 ~ '-' l'-< en :=> t..l 0 ~ <& :Y. N88'07'14"E 36.02' r i I i r I I :0 '0 I . J~ c~ 6'i!I'\JS 1/4 FILE NAME: C046114_8S.0WG DATE: 12 MAY 2004 N89'46'05"E 210.78 ! 1 in r ""! "" <0 - W t ((l N in 0 1-.1 <:I '" . S8S'07'1"'''W 219.20' SCALE: 1 "=40' t/ 1-d/J1.4;t.c.v' P 4- ,. I ( /l 4- J~) I -N l\T lr'i T ~ E_~~__-=-~_~___._---.:'.-!.J J..~~. En.gi.rl(~er8. -~h'l.~ .' L DRAWN BY: PMH CHECKED BY: KNS p.2 I "l' -! October 1 , 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil MEETING APPliCANT October 5, 2004 ITEM NO. 19 REQUEST Ordinance - Sewer Use and Service Revision AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DE?T: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Ordinance l (0 S Ok/ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: MQterlals presented at pUblic meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 04- (I?J:? BY: e lia/LlJ ~ ;2.c; U-jl..7re .e- AN ORDINANCE REPEALING EXISTING SEWER USE AND SERVICE REGULATIONS CODIFIED AT CHAPTER 4 OF TITLE 9 OF THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; RE~ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 4 OF TITLE 9 OF THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE TO BE KNOWN AS SEWER USE AND SERVICE REGULATIONS, INCLUDING PURPOSE, DEFINITIONS, APPLICATION OF CHAPTER, AUTHORITY, ESTABLISHING A SUPERINTENDENT OF WASTEWATER, ESTABLISHING RULES AND REGULATIONS, AUTHORITY OF CITY PERSONNEL, MANDATORY USE OF SEWERS, REGULATIONS FOR USE OF PUBLIC SEWERS, PROHIBITION OF DISCHARGE OF OBJECTIONABLE WASTE WITHOUT PERMISSION, BUILDING SEWERS AND CONNECTIONS, INDUSTRIAL USERS, INSPECTION AND APPROVAL OF CONNECTIONS, REJECTION OF MATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP, SEWER LINE EXTENSIONS, BACKFILLING, SEWER AND WATER PLAN ADOPTION, ASSESSMENTS AND FEES, COOPERATIVE AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS, BOARD OF APPRAISERS, SEWER CHARGE APPRAISAL, COUNCIL APPROVAL OF CHARGES AND FEES, BASIS FOR CHARGES, WASTEWATER USER FEES AND ASSESSMENTS, SEWER CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS, SPECIAL CHARGES, SEWER INSPECTIONS, SEPTIC TANK WASTE DUMPING, BILLING AND PAYMENT, DELINQUENCIES AND PROCEDURES, DISCONNECTION FOR NONPAYMENT, SEWER SYSTEM FUND, RECIEPT AND DISBURSEMENT OF MONIES, PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, MAINTENANCE OF LINES, CONTRACTOR LICENSE, POINT OF LIABILITY FOR MAINTENANCE, USER LIABILITY FOR VIOLATIONS, LIMIT A TION OF CITY LIABILITY FOR SERVICE INTERRUPTION, PROHIBITION AGAINST INJURY TO SEWER SYSTEM, PENAL TIES, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT, VALIDITY, SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO: Section 1: Chapter 4 of Title 9 is repealed. Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 1 of31 Section 2: Title 9, Chapter 4 is I'e-enacted and shalll'ead as follows: 9-4-1: POLICY AND PURPOSE: A Declaration OfPoBcy: 1. It is hereby declared that the City owns and operates both a Municipal water system and a Municipal wastewater system. It is the policy ofthe City to operate the sewer system and the water system in conjunction, one with the other, for the mutual benefit of the residents of the City. 2. Additionally, due to the integral nature of the requirement of water to operate the sewer system, violation ofthe sewer provisions may require termination of water service and to efficiently enforce these sewer provisions, such water termination is specifically authorized and is the policy of the City. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) B. Purpose: It is hereby determined and declared to be necessary and conducive to and for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the public and inhabitants of the City, and for the purpose of controlling the use and connection to and for providing an equitable distribution of the costs and expenses of maintenance, operation, upkeep and repair of the entire sewer system which includes the sewer collection system and sewage disposal facilities of the City: 1. To charge and collect service charges or fees upon all lots, lands, property and premises served or benefited by the sewer system of the City, which system and facilities consist generally of all pipe lines, conduits, catch basins, manholes, cleanouts, sewer mains, intercepting sewers, outfall sewers, lift stations, pumps, structures, mechanical equipment and facilities for the treatment and disposal of sewage or sewage by-products; 2. To provide for industrial cost recovery from all industrial users; and 3. To provide for the control, use and administration of the installation of private sewage disposal systems where a public sanitary sewer is not available. (Ord. 339, 5- 29-1979) 9-4-2: DEFINITIONS: Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the meanings oftenns used in this Chapter shall be as follows: ACT: The Federal Water Pollution Control Act entitled Public Law 92-500, and its amendments of 1972 as administered by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (BPA). Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 2 of31 BOD: Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) shall mean the quantity of oxygen utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter under standard laboratory procedure in five (5) days at twenty degrees centigrade (200C), expressed in milligrams per liter (mgll). BUILDING DRAIN: That part ofthe lowest horizontal piping of a drainage system which receives the discharge of sanitary waste inside the walls of the building and conveys it to the building sewer, beginning five feet (5') outside the inner face of the building wall. BUILDING SEWER: The extension from the building drain to the point of connection with the public sewer. CITY: Refers to the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, or its authorized or designated agent, representative, or deputy thereto. COMBINED SEWER: A sewer receiving both storm water runoff and sanitary sewage. FLOW: The volume of sewage being discharged into the sewage system from all sources including domestic, commercial and industrial uses and infiltration (yIW). GARBAGE: Solid wastes from the domestic and commercial preparation, cooking and dispensing offood, and from the handling, storage and sale of produce. INDUSTRIAL USERS: Any nondomestic user with an indirect discharge of effluent into a POTW by means of pipes, conduits, pumping stations, force mains, constructed drainage ditches, surface water intercepting ditches, and all constructed devices and appliances appurtenant thereto. This term includes federal, state, and local facilities as part of the regulated community, since such entities are subject to federal pretreatment regulations. See Title 9, Chapter 2, <<Sewer Pretreatment". INDUSTRIAL WASTES: The liquid wastes from industrial manufacturing processes, trade or business as distinct from sanitary sewage. MULTlPLE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT: Includes the various types of developments that would have common or joint ownership areas such as condominiums, townhouses, mobile home parks or courts, shopping centers, etc. NATURAL OUTLET: Any outlet into a watercourse, pond, ditch, lake or other body of surface or ground water. OWNER: A person owning real property which is, or proposes to be connected to the sewage system. pH: The logarithm of the reciprocal of the weight of hydrogen ions in grams per liter of solution with a pH value of 7 being neutral. Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 3 of31 PERSON: Any individual, firm, company, association, society, corporation or group. PRETREATMENT: The reduction of the amount of pollutants, the elimination of pollutants, or the alteration of the nature of pollutant properties in wastewater prior to, or in lieu of, introducing such pollutants into the POTW. This reduction or alteration can be obtained by physical, chemical, or biological processes; by process changes; or by other means, except by diluting the concentration of the pollutants unless allowed by an applicable pretreatment standard. PROPERLY SHREDDED GARBAGE: The wastes from the preparation, cooking and dispensing of food that have been shredded to such a degree that all particles will be carried freely under the flow conditions normally prevailing in public sewers, with no particle greater than one-half inch (1/2") in any dimension. PUBLIC SEWER: A sewer in which all owners of abutting properties have equal rights, and is controlled by public authority. SANITARY SEWER: A sewer which carries sanitary sewage and to which storm, surface and ground waters are not admitted. SERVICE CONNECTION: The point at which the building sewer connects to the public sewer. SEW AGE OR WASTE MATTER: A combination of the water-carried wastes from residences, business buildings, institutions and industrial establishments. SEW AGE TREATMENT PLANT OR W ASTEW A TER TREATMENT FACILITY: Any devices and system used in the storage, treatment, recycling and reclamation of Municipal sanitary sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature to implement section 201 of the Act. Also termed a "Publicly Owned Treatment Works" (pOTW). SEWER: A pipe or conduit for carrying sewage. SEWER USER: Any individual, firm, company, association, society or corporation or group who has connected to the sewer system. SHALLIMA Y: "Shall" is mandatory. "May" is permissive. SLUG: Any discharge of water, sewage or industrial waste which in concentration of any given constituent or in quantity of flow exceeds for any period of duration longer than fifteen (15) minutes for more than five (5) times the average 24-hour concentration or flows during normal operation. STORM DRAIN (Sometimes Termed Storm Sewer): A sewer which carries stonn and surface waters and drainage, but excludes sanitary sewage and industrial wastes, other than unpolluted water such as cooling water. Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 4 of31 SUSPENDED SOLIDS: Solids, organic or inorganic, that either float on the surface of, or are in suspension in water, sewage, or other liquids, and which are removable by laboratory filtering as prescribed in IIStandard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water" and referred. to a nonfilterable residue, W ASTEW ATER SYSTEM: All facilities for conecting, pumping, treating of sewage and disposal of treated effluent. WATERCOURSE: A channel in which a flow of water occurs, either continuously or intermittently. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) WINTER AVERAGE: The average domestic water consumption from approximately November 15 to approximately March 15 as quantified by water meter readings. 9-4-3: APPLICATION OF CHAPTER: The provisions of this Chapter shan apply to all property within the corporate limits of the City, and any special users outside of the corporate limits of the City, including all property owned or occupied by the United States of America, Ada County, and the State of Idaho. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) This Chapter shall work in conjunction with Title 9, Chapter 2, Sewer Pretreatment. If requirements, limitations or applications conflict, the more stringent shall be enforced or applied. 9-4-4: CITY AUTHORITY: The wastewater system for the City shall be under the sole and exclusive control of the Mayor and City Council, who may from time to time direct the construction, expansion, extension, repair and maintenance of the wastewater system owned and operated by the City as the necessity of the City may require. The cost of maintenance and repair of the City wastewater system must be paid out of the Enterprise Fund. (Ord. 230, 9-11-1972) 9-4-5: SUPERINTENDENT OF W ASTEW A TER: A. Office Created: There is hereby created the office ofa Superintendent of Wastewater, who shall, under the direction of the Public Works Director and the Mayor and Council, have charge of such works, mains, laterals, trunk lines, treatment plant, connection of service pipes and conduits and aU other matters pertaining to the City wastewater system. The Superintendent shan report to the Public Works Director monthly or as often as required the condition of the wastewater system and make such recommendations as the nature of the service may require. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) B. Duties: The wastewater system shall be kept in repair by the Superintendent of Wastewater and no other person, unless authorized by him, shall work on or operate said system or any part thereof It shall be the Superintendent's duty at all times to Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 5 of31 maintain said system in such a working condition that the sewage of the City is efficiently and sanitarily carried from the premises of the users of said system and processed in the wastewater treatment plant owned and operated by the City. (Ord. 230,9-11-1972) 9-4-6: RULES AND REGULATIONS: A Adoption: The City shall have the authority to adopt by resolution such rules and regulations as it shall deem appropriate for the operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, upgrade or extension and charges for said use of the sewer system and wastewater treatment facility as are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Chapter. (Ord. 431,5-7-1984) B. Amendment: Nothing herein contained shall prohibit the Mayor and Council from amending, altering or adding to the provisions ofthis Chapter in relation to the sewer service supplied by the City in regard to rates, charges, expansion, alteration, repair or any other matter related to the sewer system, as changed conditions may require from time to time. (Ord. 84, 10-8-1956) 9-4-7: AUTHORITY OF CITY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES: A Right Of Entry: The City, through its authorized representatives, bearing proper credentials and identification, shall be permitted to enter all properties for the purposes of inspection, observation, measurement, sampling and testing in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. The City shan have no authority to inquire into any processes including metallurgical, chemical, oil, refining, ceramic, paper or other industries beyond that point having a direct bearing on the kind and source of discharge to the public sewers or natural waterways. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) B. Observe Safety Rules; Liability Restrictions: While performing the necessary work on private properties referred to in the preceding subsection, the authorized representative of the City shall observe all safety rules applicable to the premises established by the sewer user and the sewer user shall be held harmless for injury or death to any City authorized representative and the City shall indemnify the sewer user against loss or damage to its property by any authorized City representative and against liability claims and demands for personal injury and property damage asserted against the sewer user and hlTowing out of the gauging and sampling operation, except as such may be caused by negligence or failure of the sewer user to maintain safe conditions as required in this Chapter or as reasonably required by prudent standards. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979; amd. 1999 Code) C. Access To Easements: The City, through its authorized representatives bearing proper credentials and identification, shall be permitted to enter all private properties through which the City holds a duly negotiated easement for the purposes of, but not limited to, inspection, observation, measurement, sampling, repair and maintenance of any portion of the sewer works lying within said easement. All entry and subsequent Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 6 of31 work, ifany, on said easement shall be done in full accordance with the terms of the duly negotiated easement pertaining to the private property involved. (Ord. 339, 5-29- 1979) 9-4-8: REQUIRED USE OF SEWERS: A. Connection To Public Sewer: The owner or occupant of any house, building or property used for residential, commercial, industrial, governmental or recreational use, or other purpose, situated within the City which is abutting on or having a permanent right of access to any street, alley or right of way in which there is located a public sewer of the City is hereby required to cease using any other method of disposing of sewage, waste or polluted water, and at his expense to connect such building directly with the public sewer in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter, within sixty (60) days after date of official notice from the City to do so; provided, however, that said sewer is within three hundred feet (300') of any property line of the building to be served or common property line in a multiple building development. B. New Subdivision Or Development: The owner or developer of a new subdivision or development whether subdivided or not shall, at his expense, construct the necessary extensions of the public sewer system to provide public sewer facilities for each lot or building area in his subdivision. Additionally, the owner or developer shall have the responsibility, at his expense, of installing the main sewer line to the boundary in his development which is farthest away from the point at which initial connection is made to the existing City sewer main. C. Prohibited Wastes: It shaH be unlawful for any person to place or deposit in any unsanitary manner on public or private property within the City, or in any area under the jurisdiction of the City, any human or animal excrement, garbage or other objectionable waste. D. Discharge Of Sewage To Natural Outlet: It shall be unlawful to discharge to any natural outlet within the City, or in any area under the jurisdiction of the City, any sewage or other polluted waters, except where suitable treatment has been provided in accordance with subsequent provisions of this Chapter. E. Privies And Septic Tanks: Except as hereinafter provided, it shall be unlawful to construct or maintain any privy, privy vault, septic tank, cesspool or other facilities intended or used for the disposal of sewage. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) 9-4-9: REGULATIONS FOR USE OF PUBLIC SEWERS: The use of the public sewers of the City shall be in accordance with the following regulations: A Discharge Of Surface Waters: Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 7 of31 1. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged from any connection any storm water, surface water, ground water, roof runoff, subsurface drainage, uncontaminated cooling water or unpolluted industrial process waters to any sanitary sewer. 2. Storm water and all other unpolluted drainage shall be discharged to sewers that are specifically designated as storm sewers, or to a natural outlet approved by the City and the entity having jurisdictional authority over the natural outlet. Industrial cooling water or unpolluted process waters may be discharged, complying with the requirements of section 308 of the Act and on approval of the City and the entity having jurisdictional authority over the natural outlet, to a storm sewer or natural outlet. B. Prohibited Discharges: See Title 9, Chapter 2, Section 2, "General Sewer Use Requirements" . 1. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any of the following described waters or wastes to any public sewers: solid or viscous substances in quantities or of such size capable of causing obstruction to the flow in sewers, or other interference with the proper operation of the sewage works such as, but not limited to, ashes, cinders, sand, concrete, mud, straw, shavings, metal, glass, rags, feathers, tar, plastics, wood, unground garbage, whole blood, paunch manure, hair and fleshings, entrails and paper dishes, cups, milk containers, etc., either whole or ground by garbage grinders. 2. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged substances, materials, waters or wastes if it appears likely, in the opinion of the City, that such wastes can harm either the sewers, wastewater treatment process or equipment, have an adverse effect on the receiving stream or can otherwise endanger life, limb, public property or constitute a nuisance. In forming its opinion as to the acceptability of these wastes, the City will give consideration to such factors as the quantities of subject wastes in relation to flows and velocities in the sewers, materials of construction ofthe sewers, nature of the sewage treatment process, capacity of the sewage treatment plant, degree of treatability of wastes in the sewage treatment plant and other pertinent factors. C. City Authority: 1. If any waters or wastes are discharged, or are proposed to be discharged to the public sewers, which waters contain the substances or possess the characteristics enumerated in subsection B2 of this Section, and which, in the judgment of the City, may have a deleterious effect upon the sewage works, processes, equipment or receiving waters, or which otherwise create a hazard to life or constitute a public nuisance, the City may: a. Reject the wastes; Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 8 of31 b. Require pretreatment to an acceptable condition for discharge to the public sewers; c. Require control over the quantities and rates of discharge; and/or d. Require payment to cover the added cost of handling and treating the wastes not covered by existing taxes or sewer charges under the provisions of Section 9-4-21 ofthis Chapter. 2. If the City permits the pretreatment or equalization of waste flows, the design and installation of the plants and equipment shall be at the owners expense and subject to the review and approval of the City and subj ect to the requirements of all applicable codes, ordinances and laws. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) D. Grease, Oil and Sand Interceptors: Grease, oil and sand interceptors shall be provided at the owners expense when, in the opinion of the City, they are necessary for the proper handling of liquid wastes containing grease or any flammable wastes, sand or other harmful ingredients; except that such interceptors shall not be required for private living quarters or dwelling units. All interceptors shall be of a type and capacity approved by the City and shall be located as to be readily and easily accessible for cleaning and inspection. There shall be one (1) interceptor per user; interceptors shall not serve more than one user unless specifically approved by the City in writing. These interceptors shall be adequately maintained by the owner and are subject to periodic inspection by the City. (Ord. 795, 7-7-1998) E. Maintenance Of Pretreatment Facilities: Where preliminary treatment or flow- equalizing facilities are provided for any waters or wastes, they shall be maintained continuously in satisfactory and effective operation by the owner at his expense. If, in the opinion of the City, maintenance by the owner of the pretreatment facility is inadequate, the owner shall provide a maintenance schedule to the City for review and approval. Upon approval of the maintenance schedule, the owner shall commence with the scheduled maintenance and provide documented proof of the maintenance activity to the City. F. Manhole Installation: When required by the City, the owner of any property serviced by a building sewer carrying industrial wastes shall install a suitable control manhole together with such necessary meters and other appurtenances in the building sewer to facilitate observation, sampling and measurement of the wastes. Such manhole, when required, shall be accessibly and safely located, and shall be constructed in accordance with plans approved by the City. The manhole shall be installed by the owner at his expense, and shall be maintained by him so as to be safe and accessible at all times. G. Measurements, Tests And Analyses: All measurements, tests and analyses of the characteristics of waters and wastes to which reference is made in this Chapter shall be determined in accordance with the latest edition of "Standard Methods for the Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 9 of31 Examination of Water and Wastewater", published by the American Public Health Association, and shall be detennined at the control manhole provided or upon suitable samples taken at said control manhole. In the event that no special manhole has been required, the control manhole shall be considered to be the nearest downstream manhole in the public sewer to the point at which the building sewer is connected. Sampling shall be carried out by customarily accepted methods to reflect the effect of constituents upon the sewage works and to determine the existence of hazards to life, limb and property. H. Special Agreements; No statement contained in this Chapter shall be construed as preventing any special agreement or arrangement between the City and any industrial entity whereby an industrial waste of unusual strength or character may be accepted by the City for treatment, subject to payment therefore by the industrial entity. I. Notice Of Violation; Remedial Action: Any property owner or sewer user violating the provisions ofthis Section shall, upon notice by the City, immediately install such preliminary treatment through separators, traps and/or chemical, physical or biochemical processes as will make and assure that the sewage contributed from such property or premises will meet the requirements of this Chapter. (Ord. 339, 5-29- 1979) 9-4-10: PERMISSION TO DISCHARGE OBJECTIONABLE WATER OR WASTES: A. Review And Approval: The admission into the public sewers of any water or wastes having: Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) greater than 300 mg/l, Chemical oxygen demand (COD) greater than 900 mgll, Suspended solids in excess of300 mg/l, shall be subject to the review and approval of the City. B. Pretreatment Provided By Owner: Where necessary, in the opinion ofthe City, the owner shall provide, at his expense, such pretreatment as may be necessary to reduce the BOD to three hundred (300) mg/I, the COD to nine hundred (900) mg/I and the suspended solids to three hundred (300) mg/L Plans, specifications and any other pertinent information relating to proposed preliminary treatment facilities shall be submitted for the approval of the City and of the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, and no construction of such facilities shall be commenced until said approvals are obtained in writing. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 10 of31 9-+-11: BUILDING SEWERS AND SERVICE CONNECTIONS: All materials and workmanship in the installation of building sewers and service connections shall conform to the following regulations: A. Permit Required: No unauthorized person shall uncover, make any connections with or opening into, use, alter or disturb any public sewer or appurtenance thereof without first obtaining a written permit from the City. The permit shall not be issued until all sewer assessment charges and other applicable fees have been paid in full. B. Classes Of Permits: There shall be two (2) classes of building sewer permits: 1) a general permit for residential and commercial sewer service, and 2) industrial user permits for sewer service to establishments producing industrial wastes. 1. General Permits: The owner or his agent shall make application to the Public Works Department for general permits. The permit application shall be supplemented by any plans, specifications or other information considered pertinent in the judgment of the City at the time the application is filed. Also, the owner or his agent shall pay to the City, at the time the permit is issued, an assessment fee, which shall be established by resolution of the City Council; and 2. Industrial Permits: Industrial user permits shall be applied for by the owner or his agent by letter to the City Council accompanied by an executed copy of the industrial user agreement together with any plans, specifications or other information considered pertinent in the judgment of the City. Industrial user permits shall be approved by the City Council based on recommendation by the Public Works Director. Approval shall be contingent upon the availability of excess capacity in the sewage treatment plant, the provisions of this Chapter and any other considerations the City Council deems appropriate. The amount of the permit, inspection fee and assessment fee for an industrial wastes sewer service will vary with each permit and shall be established by the City at the time of application. The owner shall pay aU fees at the time the permit is issued. C. Costs Borne By Owner; Liability: All costs and expense incident to the installation and connection of the building sewer and service connection shall be borne by the owner. The owner shall indemnify and hold harmless the City from any loss or damage that may directly or indirectly be occasioned by the installation of the building sewer and the marking of the service connection for same to the public sewer. D. Separate Connections For Each Building: A separate and independent building sewer and service connection shall be provided for every building. Any exception to this requirement shall conform with Uniform Plumbing Code. Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 11 of31 E. Old Building Sewers: Old building sewers may be used in connection with new buildings only when they are found, on examination and being tested as required by the City, to meet all requirements of this Chapter. F. Conformance With Building And Plumbing Codes: The materials of construction of the building sewer and service connections, and the methods to be used in excavating, placing of the pipe, jointing, testing and backfilling the trench, shall all conform to the requirements of the Building and Plumbing Codes as have been or may be adopted by the City 31 . G. Pipe Size; Building Sewer Grade And Slope: All building sewers shall meet the requirements of the International Building Code or Uniform Plumbing Code. H. Connecting Surface Water Drainage To Building Sewer: No person shall make connection of roof downspouts, exterior foundation drains, areaway drains or other sources of surface runoff or ground water to a building sewer or building drain which in turn is connected directly or indirectly to a public sanitary sewer. I. Service Connection Requirements: The service connection to the public sewer shall conform to the requirements of the International Building Code and Uniform Plumbing Codes as adopted by the City. J. Notify City For Inspection: The applicant for the building sewer permit shall notify the City when the connection to the public sewer to the building sewer is ready for inspection. K. Guarding Excavations: All excavations for building sewer installation shall be adequately guarded with barricades and lights so as to protect the public from hazard. Streets, sidewalks, parkways and other public property disturbed in the course of the work shall be restored in a manner satisfactory to the City. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) L. Work Done By Contractor: The connection ofthe building sewer service to the public main sewer shall be made by a public works contractor having a valid State ofIdaho license for this specialty work. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) 9-4-12: INDUSTRIAL USERS: All industrial users ofthe sewer system shall comply with any applicable requirements of sections 204(b), 307 and 308 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. There shall be two (2) classes of industrial users: a) major contributing industry, and b) minor contributing industry. A. Contributing Industries Defined: The contributing industries are defined as follows: 1. Major Contributing Industry: A major contributing industry is one that: Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 12 of31 a. Will contribute greater than ten percent (10%) of the design hydraulic flow of the treatment works. b. Will contribute greater than ten percent (10%) of the design pollutant loading of the treatment works. c. Has in its waste a toxic pollutant in toxic amounts as defined in standards issued under section 307(a) of the Act. d. Has significant impact, either singly or in combination with other contributing industries, on the sewer system or the quality of its effluent. 2. Minor Contributing Industry: A minor contributing industry shall be aU industries not included in the major contributing industry classification as defined in subsection Al ofthis Section. B. Requirements: 1. Monitoring Wastes: All major contributing industriesl wastes shall be monitored by the City or industry on a regular basis at intervals not less than monthly, and more frequently as the characteristics of the specific industrial discharge may dictate. Minor contributing industries shall be monitored by the City or industry as the characteristics of the specific industrial discharge may dictate as detennined by the City. 2. Reports To City: All major contributing industries shall submit to the City on the first day ofthe months of June and December, a statement in writing regarding specific actions taken to achieve full compliance with the requirements of section 307 of the Act. 3. Report Changes In Flow Or Characteristics: Each contributing industry shall report any substantial (exceeding 10%::1::) change in flow or characteristics of wastewater being discharged into the sewer system. The report shall include quantity and quality ofeflluent and duration and frequency of discharge. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) 9-4-13: INSPECTION AND APPROVAL OF CONNECTIONS: No connection of any kind to a public sewer line shall be made and no sewage permitted to flow through such connection except pursuant to inspection of and approval issued by the City. See Section 9-4-11 ofthis Chapter for sewer permits, inspection fees, inspection notices, etc. (Ord. 339, 5-29R1979) 9-4-14: REJECTION OF MATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP: The City may reject any material or workmanship for cause and, upon such order, rejected material shall be removed and replaced with approved material. Disapproved Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 13 of31 workmanship shall cause the removal and replacement of all materials involved, including appurtenances, excavation, backfilling and other work items. (Ord. 339, 5-29- 1979) 9-4-15: SEWER LINE EXTENSIONS: A. Compliance With Master Plan: All proposed extensions of the Municipal sewer system to serve undeveloped areas within the existing corporate limits, newly annexed areas or areas outside the corporate limits shall comply with the overall master plan for the Municipal sewer system, unless otherwise authorized by the Public Works Director. B. Owner Responsible For Costs; Exception: Costs for all extensions which lie outside the boundary limits of the property for which the extension is requested shall be the responsibility of that property owner or his agent. Cost for sewer extensions within the property for which the extension is requested shall also be the responsibility of the owner or his agent. Sewer extensions shall be required to extend to the farthest boundary of the development. When it is necessary to install oversized lines as part of an extension, the owner may request a reimbursement agreement per M.C.C. 9-4-19. C. Newly Developed Areas: Unless a special permit is granted by the City, all Municipal sewer system extensions into newly developing areas shall be installed prior to the construction of any new streets. D. Compliance With City Specifications: All design and construction of any extensions to the Municipal sewer system shall comply with the official specifications for sewer system extensions as adopted by the City. E. Preparation And Filing Of Plans: The plans for aU extensions to the sewer system shall be prepared and signed by a registered professional engineer as per the licensing requirements of the Idaho Code. Construction may not commence until plans have been approved by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality as required by the Idaho Code. In approving a plan for extension to the Municipal sewer system, the City reserves the right to stipulate other requirements such as a special permit fee, rights-of-way limits, sequence of construction, time limits for having existing service disrupted, the provision of surety guaranteeing completion and other similar measures as may be required to protect the public. No work shall commence on any such extension of the Municipal sewer system until the extension project has been approved by the City. F. Certification By Registered Engineer: After the construction of any Municipal sewer system extensions, it shall be the obligation of the owner, or his agent, to have a registered professional engineer certify to the City and to the Idaho Department of Enviroruuental Quality that the said system extensions were installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications on file with the respective agencies. Following certification by the registered professional engineer and acceptance by the Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 14 of31 City, the entire extension of the Municipal sewer system shall become the property of the City and it shall be the City's responsibility to maintain and operate the system thereafter. G. Connections Made After Extension Accepted: If it is necessary for the City to permit a sewer service connection and/or sewer service line at any time after the extension has been originally accepted by the City, the owner or his agent shall be required to pay the sewer assessment fee as well as the standard permit and inspection fees as may be established by the City for such purposes. The owner or agent is responsible for all costs associated with installation of the sewer service connection to the sewer main and the sewer service line. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) H. Work Done By Contractor: The installation of all public sewer systems shall be performed and completed by a contractor possessing a valid State ofIdaho public works license with the proper endorsement for the work. 9-4-16: BACKFILLING: Backfilling of building sewers and service connections within the limits of public rights of ways or easements shall conform to special specifications promulgated by the Ada County Highway District, for sewer installation, and shall be subject to inspection by and approval of the Ada County Highway District. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) 9-4-17: SEWER AND WATER PLANS ADOPTED: A Adoption Of Plans: The "2004 City of Meridian Wastewater Treatment Plan Facility Plan Update" is adopted as the official planning documents for the City of Meridian wastewater treatment system. The "2003 Sewer Master Plan Update" is adopted as the official planning document for the City of Meridian sanitary sewer collection system. . B. Treatment Requirements: Wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal will comply with State ofIdaho Department of Environmental Quality and United States Environmental Protection Agency rules and regulations. (Res. 54, 11-5-1973) 9-4-18: ASSESSMENT AND OTHER FEES: A Sewer Assessment Fee. Notwithstanding any of the provisions of this Chapter, any person, firm, partnership, corporation or association or property owner who has not otherwise paid for, or contributed proportionately toward, the costs and expenses of constructing a sewer line, whether that construction has been performed by the City, a local improvement district or a private entity, or combination thereof, and who subsequently desires to connect to the City sewer system, shall be required to pay, in addition to the required connection charges of subsection 9-4-25B of this Chapter and the monthly user charges of Section 9-4-24 of this Chapter, an additional connection Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 15 of31 charge which shall be known as an lIassessment fee"" The assessment fee shall be computed on an "equivalent residential unit", or "ERU' basis. B. Fee Set By City Council: The sewer assessment fee for each parcel of ground connected to a trunk sewer line shall be established and set by the City Council. The sewer assessment fee may be different for residential, commercial, and industrial uses and may be different for differing uses within those three (3) classifications depending upon the considerations of effluent quality but shall be as consistent as possible under similar factual circumstances. The sewer assessment fee shall be assessed in terms of equivalent residential units. (Oed. 482, 6-16-1987) C. Wastewater Treatment Assessment Fee. A treatment fee shall be required for every sewer user initiating sewer service, changing use of a property already connected to sewer or increasing the discharged wastewater flow. 9-4-19: COOPERATIVE AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS: A. Reimbursement To Sewer User: Should a sewer user at his own expense construct an extension to the sewer system in a public right of way or easement with prior approval of the City and in accordance with the standards and designs of the City and which sewer line extension has been determined by the City to be able to benefit properties other than the user's, the sewer user constructing the extension may be reimbursed for the proportionate cost of the sewer benefiting adjacent or other properties by entering into an agreement with the City ifany of the following apply: 1. The sewer extension lies outside the sewer user's property and provides sewer service to other property; 2. The sewer extension is within the sewer user's property and is a gravity sewer larger than eight-inch diameter; 3. The eight -inch gravity sewer within the sewer user's property is required to be greater than ten (10) feet deep to serve upstream properties. 4. The sewer extension includes a permanent lift station. 5. The sewer extension includes a temporary lift station which the City requires to be oversized to serve adjacent or upstream properties. B. To be eligible for reimbursement, the user must: 1. Design the sewer extension in substantial accordance with the City of Meridian Master Sewer Plan; 2. Receive City approval of the sewer extension construction plans; 3. Construct the sewer extension in accordance with approved plans and City of Meridian standard specifications and details; 4. Solicit and receive three (3) bids for the sewer extension and select the lowest responsive bid as determined in a bid opening. The user must notify the Public Works Department ofthe bid opening forty-eight (48) hours in advance and Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 16 of31 provide the opportunity for a Public Works Department representative to attend the bid opening during normal working hours; 5. Receive preliminary plat approval from City Council for the development to be served by the sewer extension. Sewer extensions intended to serve non- subdivision projects, and for which the developer seeks a reimbursement agreement; must receive approval for a reimbursement agreement from City Council prior to construction plan approval by the City. C. Developer Reimbursement Agreements The City shall not be required to enter into a reimbursement agreement and whether or not to enter into such an agreement shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council; provided however, that: 1. No reimbursement agreement shall have a duration greater than ten (10) years unless the City is a beneficiary of the agreement. 2. No reimbursement agreement shall pay to the sewer user paying for or constructing a sewer line extension more than one hundred percent (1 O()O~) of his actual engineering and construction costs; it being noted that in most cases at least some of the cost would ordinarily be assessed to the sewer users own property. 3. A reimbursement agreement may provide for interest to be paid to the sewer user. 4. The City may charge and may receive a five percent (5%) administrative fee against the amount reimbursable to the sewer user for administration, accounting, auditing. and payment of the reimbursement payments made to the sewer user so extending the sewer line and having reached a reimbursement agreement with the City, 5. The reimbursement agreement shall be personal to the sewer user entering into it and shall not be assigned without the written consent of the City, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. 6. The agreement will terminate when the user has been fully reimbursed ifthe agreed upon reimbursement amount is paid prior to the end of the term of the agreement. 7. The agreement shall be binding on the sewer user and his assigns, successors, heirs and executors and may be recorded as an encumbrance against the property of the sewer user. 8. The sewer user shan be required to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and aU liability whatsoever until the sewer line has been accepted for maintenance by the City. Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 17 of3I ( 9. Said lines, after acceptance, shall become part of the City sewer system and be the sole property of the City. D. Methods of Reimbursement The reimbursement to the party constructing off-site or over-size or over-depth sewer will be from the sewer assessment fees owed or paid by the user as required under 9- 4-18(B). E. Amount of Reimbursement 1. Offsite Gravity Sewer Extensions. The amount of reimbursement to the user shall be based on the projected proportion capacity that the user's project requires. The amount of reimbursement shall be based on actual construction costs, and may include reasonable engineering, surveying, construction staking, project management and easement acquisition costs. 2. Onsite Gravity Sewer Extensions. The amount of reimbursement to the user constructing "over-size" or "over-depth" gravity sewer shall be based on the percentages in the following table. Only construction costs are eligible for reimbursement for "over-size" or "over-depth" onsite gravity extensions. Tool 1 0 . S R" b P e nSlte ewer elm ursement ercentage (1 )Depth, ft 10" 12" IS" 18" 21" 24" 2T' 30" 36" 10 11.5% 25.8% 39.5% 46.5% 50.0% 56.6% 63.5% 67.1% 72.0% 12 17.9% 30.3% 42.5% 48.9% 52.1% 58.2% 64.6% 68.1% 72.6% 14 23.3% 34.3% 45.2% 51.1% 54.0% 59.6% 65.7% 68.9% 73.3% 16 36.1% 43.9% 52.1% 56.6% 58.9% 63.5% 68.5% 71.3% 75.0% 18 39.5% 46.5% 54.0% 58.2% 60.3% 64.6% 69.3% 72.0% 75.5% 20 42.5% 48.9% 55.8% 59.6% 61.7% 65.7% 70.1% 72.6% 76.0% 22 47.7% 53.1% 58.9% 62.3% 64.1% 67.6% 71.6% 73.9% 77.0% 24 50.0% 54.9% 60.3% 63.5% 65.2% 68.5% 72.3% 74.4% 77.5% (1) Depth calculated as average depth from finish grade to pipe invert from manhole to manhole. F. Reimbursement To City: Where the City constructs a sewer line extension, either on its own or in conjunction with another person or entity, the City may enter into a reimbursement agreement as authorized above such that the City is reimbursed for its costs of construction, engineering, legal costs and interest. (Ord. 482, 6-16-1987) 9-4-20: BOARD OF APPRAISERS: A. Board Created: There is hereby created the Board of Appraisers, consisting of three (3) members, to be the same persons as the Mayor, the City Clerk and the Public Works Director. Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 18 of31 B. Duties: The Board of Appraisers shall be delegated the duty of hearing any disputes, objections or appeals by a sewer user regarding assessment fees, montWy user charges or other fees established by this chapter. 9-4-21: SEWER CHARGE APPRAISAL: If the user or owner disputes a sewer connection fee or monthly user charge, the user or owner may request that the parcel being subject to sewer connection, charge, periodic user charge, or other fees as provided for in Section 9-4-23 of this Chapter be appraised and assessed by the Board of Appraisers for the purpose of establishing the equivalent connection rating, the sewer connection charge, the inspection fee, the monthly service charge or other fees to be charged or assessed to and against such property. In making such appraisement and assessment, there shall be taken into consideration the area ofland being served and the amount offlow (Q), the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), the suspended solids (88) and any other pertinent components of the wastes that the user is contributing to the system so as to establish, as nearly as possible, the rate, charge or fee for each property on the same relative basis as is imposed upon other like property and uses within the City that has or will receive the sewer service. This procedure may also be used to determine the initial charges set forth herein or to change or modify the initial charges. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) 9-4-22: FINAL APPROVAL OF SCHEDULE OF CHARGES: The City Council has the power to approve, confirm, modify or amend any charge, rate or fee provided by this Chapter and the decision of the City Council shall be final. Upon final approval of the City Council, the same shall then and there be in effect and a copy thereof shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) 9-4-23: BASIS FOR SEWER CHARGES: A. System Of Charges Established: There is hereby established a system of assessment fees, user charges, permit, review and inspection fees, periodic service charges and other fees for the use of, and for service rendered by the sewer works of the City. The rates, charges and fees provided by this Chapter are hereby levied and assessed against each lot, parcel of land, building or property having any connection with the sanitary sewer works of the City or otherwise discharging sanitary sewage, industrial wastewater or other liquids directly into the sanitary sewer works of the City. The rates, charges and fees shall be billed to and paid by the owner of each lot, parcel of land, building or property served by the sewer system. B. Properties Subject To Charges: It is specifically enacted that all property in the City to which a public sewer is available and is required to connect to the sewer as required in Section 9-4-8 of this Chapter, but is not used by the owner or occupier of said parcel of land, is still subject to user charges under the provisions of this Chapter. (Ord. 376, 7-7-1980) Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 19 of31 9-4-24: WASTEWATER USER FEES AND ASSESSMENT FEES: The monthly sewer user rates for sanitary sewer service in the City are based on gallons of water used as determined by the water meter readings. Residential homeowner's sanitary sewer user charges will be based on the actual water recorded for monthly water meter readings during the period of the year from approximately November 15 to the following March IS. For the following eight (8) month period, the average monthly reading for the period of November 15 to the following March IS, termed the "winter average", shall be the basis for the monthly sewer user charge. However, if the actual water use recorded for any billing period between March 15 and November 15 is less than the preceding "winter average", the sewer user charge will be based on the actual water use. Also, provided, however, where there is a new owner, a new occupancy, or a change in occupancy, such as in the case of sale or new residence construction or sales of existing residences, between November 15 and March 15, the sewer user charge shall be based on the average winter residential water use in the City which is six thousand five hundred (6,500) gallons per month unless the current water meter readings is less than six thousand five hundred (6,500) gallons. In this case, the sewer user charge will be based on actual metered water use. All other users such as commercial and industrial shall be based on their monthly water consumption. The user charges may be reviewed annually. The user charge system is based on the following: (Ord. 477,4-21-1987; amd. 1999 Code) A Monthly Service Charges: 1. The minimum sewer charge shall be as established by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 02-967, 7-23-2002) B. Number Of Equivalent Residential Units Per Use: The wastewater assessment fees for all new sewer users, other than single-family residential, shall be based on the number of equivalent residential units (ERU's) listed in Table 2, , unless other acceptable means of determining ERU's are used. Other acceptable means may include the Uniform Plumbing Code "fixture unit" method or examination and analysis of historical consumption records of similar facilities within or outside the City of Meridian Table 2. Equivalent Residential Units Classification Apartment Bank Bar Barbershop, per chair Beauty salon, per operator station Bowling alley, per lane Number Of Equivalent Connections Minimum Equivalent Connections See Multiple Living Unit 2 2 0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.2 1.0 Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 20 of3! Cafe, per customer seating capacity Car dealer Car wash (to be computed on an individual basis) Church Club, private Condominium Dentist, per practitioner Department store (per 3,000 square feet) Doctor, per practitioner Drugstore Dry cleaners Duplex F ourplex Garage (minimum) Grocery store Hospital, per bed Industry (see Major or minor contributing industry) Laundries Commercial (to be computed on an individual basis) Self-service up to and including 10 washing machines Each washing machine in excess of 10 Lodge or private club Major contributing industry (as per separate agreement) Minor contributing industry (as per separate agreement) Mobile home court or park First space Each additional space, long term tenant type Each additional space, short term tenant type Mobile home or trailer house on own premises Motel. hotel. roomin2 house. etc. With cooking facilities First unit Each additional unit Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 21 of31 0.1 2 2.0 xxx 2 2 See Multiple Living Unit 1 1 1 2 2 See Multiple Living Unit See Multiple Living Unit 2 See Retail Food Store 0.15 xxx 4 0.25 2 xxx xxx 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 Without cooking facilities First unit 1 Each additional unit 0.25 Multiple livine unit Studio or 1 bedroom 1 2 bedrooms 1 3 or more bedrooms 1 Office building for each 2,500 square feet of gross 1 floor space or fraction thereof Photo development lab 2 Railroad depot 2 Restaurant, per customer seating capacity 0.1 2.0 Retail food store for each 1,500 square feet of gross 1 floor area or fraction thereof Retail store for each 3,000 square feet of gross floor 1 area or fraction thereof Schools per each 50 students in average daily 1 attendance or fraction thereof Service station Full service 4 Gas and restroom service only 2 With car wash (to be computed on an individual xxx basis) Single-family residence 1 Swimmine pool Private, for each 500 square feet of pool water 0.25 surface area Public (to be computed on an individual basis) xxx Tavern Theater Townhouse 2 2 1 Trailer court or park First unit 1 Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 22 of31 Each additional space, long term tenant type Each additional space, short term tenant type 0.75 0.5 Triplex Variety store, for each 3,000 square feet of gross floor area or fraction thereof See Multiple Living Unit 1 9-4-25: SEWER CONNECTION REQUIREMENTS; FEES AND CHARGES: A Permit Required; Fees: L Application For Pennit: To obtain municipal sewer service, the owner or his agent shan make application to the City. The permit application shall be supplemented by any plans, specifications or other information considered pertinent in the judgment of the City. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) 2. Permit And Inspection Fee: A permit and inspection fee shall be paid to the City at the time the permit is issued. Also, the owner or his agent shall pay to the City, at the time the permit is issued, an assessment charge in the amount as provided for in section 9-4-24 of this chapter. The amount of the permit and inspection fee shall be as established by resolution of the City Council. B. Assessment Charges: The owner, or his agent, of all properties connecting to the public sewer of the City under the terms of this chapter shall pay an assessment charge as established by resolution of the City Council for each equivalent connection or fraction thereof as may be assigned to the property by the City in accordance with section 9-4-18 ofthis chapter. C. Materials And Construction Methods: The materials of construction of the sewer service line and the methods to be used in excavating, placing of the pipe, jointing, testing and backfilling of the trench and surface replacement shall all conform to the requirements of specifications and codes as have been or may be adopted by the City. D. Separate Connection For Each Building: A separate and independent City sewer service connection shall be provided for each building. E. Notify City For Inspection: The applicant for the City sewer service connection shall notify the City Plumbing Inspector when the connection of the sewer service connection and line to the public sewer main is ready for inspection. (Ord. 339, 5-29- 1979) 9-4-26: SPECIAL CHARGES; SEWER INSPECTIONS; SEPTIC TANK WASTE DUMPING: Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 23 of31 A. COlUlection To City Sewer System Outside City Limits: In order to obtain municipal sewer system service to parcel(s) which are either partially or entirely outside of the corporate City limits the following provisions must be complied with: 1. The applicant shall make application to the Public Works Director. Any agreement to provide sewer service outside the City limits shall provide that the applicant will agree to the terms and conditions required by this section as a consideration for obtaining such service. The City Council shall establish an application fee by resolution or upon the recommendation of the Public Works Director given the amount of staff review required for processing the application. The application shall specify the legal description of the parcel(s) for which service is being applied, the name and address of the legal owner(s) of the parcel(s) and purpose of the requested service. 2. Application must be filed with the Public Works Department. 3. Following the application and the payment of the application fee, the Public Works Director shall then review the circumstances presented by the application in accordance with the terms and conditions and regulations of this chapter as are relevant to the application and which shall also include a review of the effect the granting of the application will have on the ability ofthe municipal sewer system to provide an acceptable level of service to developed parcels with existing service within the City limits which shall not be compromised. 4. The Public Works Director shall then review the findings and recommendations with the applicant for comment. 5. The Public Works Director shall then submit the application and a report of recommendation(s) to the City Council regarding the application. 6. The City Council, in the exercise of its discretion may either grant or deny the application after review of the application and the report ofrecommendation(s) of the Public Works Director. 7. In the event the Council grants the application it shall include as a condition that the legal owner(s) ofthe parcel(s) shall enter into an "agreement for the extension of domestic sewer service outside the City limits It (hereinafter in this section referred to as the "agreement") which agreement form shall provide that the legal owner(s) of the parcel(s) agree that the provisions of the City's ordinances, regulations and policies which appertain to the regulation, control and use of its domestic sewer system including hookup, service fees, and inspection fees, apply as terms of the "agreementll and which form shall also provide that the owner(s) of the parcel(s) agree to the annexation into the City of the parcel(s) serviced; and the council may also impose such other conditions of granting the application as are reasonable to assure the protection of the level of service to developed parcels within the City limits and to assure that the proprietary funds of the City domestic sewer service are not used for Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 24 of31 the extension and/or enlargement of the system which conditions shall also be included in the "agreement". 8. The sewer user of the parcel(s) serviced pursuant to a granted application under this section shall be considered a user and subject to the terms and conditions of the lIagreementn so long as the property being served remains outside of the corporate limits ofthe City. 9. Notwithstanding subsection A5 of this section, if the requested connection is for a residence, or a multi-family residence not exceeding four (4) residential units, and if sewer service is readily available to the affected parcel without extension of service, then, if the Public Works Director deems it in the best interests of the City to do so, said connection may be authorized by the public works director without action by the City Council. If the director declines to approve the connection, the request will proceed to the City Council for final decision. (Ord. 01-910,2-27-2001) B. Sewer Line And Facility Inspection Fee: A fee shall be established and charged for inspection of sanitary sewer lines and facilities installed by any entity other than the City of Meridian. The fee shall be approved by the City CounciL C. Septic Tank Waste Dumping Fee 1: A fee shall be established and charged for dumping septic waste into the City of Meridian wastewater treatment plant. The fee shall be approved by the City CounciL 9-4--27: BILLING AND PAYJ.\1IENT OF MONTHLY CHARGES: All monthly sewer charges shall be due and payable from the owner to the Finance Department between the first and tenth day of each month for billing from the previous cycle. For new construction, the monthly user charge shall be computed from the date the service connection has been inspected and approved or when the building being served is substantially completed, whichever is the latest date. For new residential construction completed during the eight (8) lawn sprinkling months, the monthly sewer user charges shall be based on the use of six thousand five hundred (6,500) gallons per month or actual use, whichever is less. (Ord. 477,4-21-1987) 9-4-28: DELINQUENCIES; CITY PROCEDURE: A. Termination Of Water Service For Nonpayment: If a sewer user has not paid the billing within fifteen (15) days from the date of the statement, it shall be deemed delinquent. The City shall follow the procedure set forth in section 9-1-21 of this title for termination of water services, and shall cause the water supplied to said sewer user to be turned off from the premises, the City taking notice that, without water, the sewer system of the user cannot be used and shutting off the water is the only way to prevent the use of the sewer for nonpayment; provided, if the charges are not paid within ten (10) days after the delinquency notice, and if no penalty is due for Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 25 of31 nonpayment of water charges, an additional penalty as set by resolution of the City Council will be added to the account and must be paid to restore service. B. Lien Against Property: Where allowed by law, all delinquent charges or fees, as provided by this chapter, not paid after the final determination of the sewer user's account shall be imposed as a lien against and upon the property or premises against which such charge or fee is levied or assessed, and the City Clerk shall, at the time of certifying the City taxes, certify such delinquencies together with all penalties to the tax collector of Ada County, Idaho, and when so certified, the same shall be a lien upon the property. All monies collected by the Clerk under the provisions of this section shall be paid over to the City Treasurer in the same manner as is required for the payment of other City monies. C. Use At New Location: The owner of any property leaving a delinquency in sewer fees at any location shall not be entitled to the use of the sewer system at any new location until all fee delinquencies are paid. D. Sewer Fund: All fees and charges received and collected under the authority of this chapter shall be deposited and credited to a fund to be designated as the sewer fund within the utility enterprise fund. The accounts of said fund shall show aU receipts and expenditures for the maintenance, operation, upkeep and repair of the sanitary sewer system and any payments into a sinking fund established for the purpose of paying principal of and interest on the sewer indebtedness ofthe City which shall from time to time be outstanding. As provided by law, when budgeted and appropriated, the funds and credits to the account of the sewer fund shall be available for the payment ofthe requirements for the maintenance, operation, repairs and upkeep of the sanitary sewer system of the City, and to the extent legally available, for payment into a sinking fund established for the payment of the principal and interest on any sewer bond indebtedness of the City which shall from time to time be outstanding. (Ord. 03-1044,9-23-2003) 9-4-29: DISCONNECTION OF SERVICE FOR NONPAYMENT: A. Discontinue Sewer And Water Service: The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all property served with sanitary sewer within and outside the corporate limits of the City, including aU property owned or occupied by the United States of America, Ada County, and the state ofIdaho, and in case of nonpayment or delinquency, the Wastewater Superintendent is, after the City has complied with the provisions of section 9-4-28 of this chapter, hereby authorized and directed to disconnect and/or plug the sewer connection with the sewer system of Meridian and direct the Water Superintendent to terminate the water supply to the property. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) B. Penalty For Turning On Water: Ifany person, after the water has been turned offfrom the premises on account of nonpayment of rates or other violation of this chapter or the rules and regulations pertaining to the sewer service, shaU turn on or pennit to be turned on or use or permit the water to be used, without authority, he shall be guilty Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 26 of31 of a misdemeanor and, on conviction thereof, shall be subject to penalty as provided in section 1-4-1 ofthis code for each offense. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987; amd. 1999 Code) 9-4-30: SEWER SYSTEM FUND: A Fund Established; Purpose: All fees and charges received and collected under authority of this Chapter shall be deposited and credited to a special fund to be designated as the Sewer System Fund. The accounts of said Fund shall show all receipts and expenditures for the maintenance, operation, upkeep and repair of the sewer works and any payments into sinking funds as may be established for the purpose of: 1. Paying principal of and interest on the general obligation or revenue sewer bonds of the City which shall from time to time be outstanding; 2. Other special funds as may be established by the City Council. B. Disposition Of Funds And Credits: As provided by law, when budgeted and appropriated, the funds and credits to the account ofthe Sewer System Fund shall be available for the payment of the requirements for the maintenance, operation, repairs and upkeep of the sewer works of the City and, to the extent legally available. for payment into a sinking fund established for the payment of the principal of and interest on the general obligation sewer bonds of the City which shall from time to time be outstanding. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) 9-4-31: RECEIPT AND DISBURSEMENT OF MONIES: All monies collected by the Finance Department under the provisions of this Chapter shall be paid, received, disbursed and accounted for as directed by the City Council. (Ord. 84. 10-8-1956) 9-4-32: PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS: Where a public sanitary sewer is not available under the provisions ofthis Chapter, the building sewer shall be connected to a private sewer disposal system complying with the provisions of this Chapter and in accordance with the following special provisions: A Permit Required; Permit And Inspection Fee: Before commencement of construction of a private sewage disposal system, the owner shall first obtain written approval from the City. The applicant shall provide plans, specifications and other information as may be deemed necessary by the City. Review and inspection fees shall be established by resolution of the City CounciL B. Inspection And Approval By City: Building permits for any structure to be served by an approved private sewage disposal system shall not be issued until the installation is completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The City shall be allowed to Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 27 of3! inspect the work at any stage of construction and the owner shall notify the City when the work is ready for final inspection and before any underground works are covered. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of all applicable inspection fees prior issue of building permit. C. Compliance With State Regulations: The type, capacities, location and layout of a private sewage disposal system shall comply with all of the rules and regulations and recommendations of the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Idaho Department of Health and Welfare and/or the Central District Health Department. No septic tank: or cesspool shall be permitted to discharge to any natural outlet. D. Connection To Public Sewer When Available: At such time as a public sewer becomes available to property served by a private sewage disposal system, a direct connection shall be made to the public sewer in compliance with this Chapter and any septic tank, cesspool or similar private sewage disposal facilities shall be abandoned and filled with suitable material and all appropriate fees paid. E. Operation In Sanitary Manner: The owners shall operate and maintain the private sewage disposal facility in a sanitary manner at all times and at no expense to the City. F. Septic Tank: Pumpings; Disposal And Fee: Septic tank pumpings shall not be deposited in any manhole, cleanout or sewer opening. The pumpings may be dumped at the sewage treatment plant at a point designated by the City. The number of gallons dumped and the nature of the wastes shall be provided to the plant operator prior to dumping. A fee for the septic tank dumping shall be approved by the City CounciC3 . G. Additional State Requirements: No statement contained in this Section shall be construed to interfere with any additional requirements that may be imposed by the Department of Environmental Quality or Department of Health and Welfare of the State of Idaho. (Ord. 339, 5-29-1979) 9-4-33: MAINTENANCE OF LINES; CONTRACTOR LICENSE: A. Maintenance Of Lines; Digging In Streets: All users of the sewer system shall keep their pipe connections and other apparatus in good repair and protected from freezing at their own expense, but no person, except under the direction of the Public Works Department, shall be allowed to dig into the street, alley, sidewalk or easement beneath which the lateral and trunk: line sewers run or to tap into any such lateral or trunk line in any manner. B . Work By Contractor, License Required: Any contractor excavating within the limits of the public right of way shall posses a valid public works contractor's license for that specialty. (Ord. 477,4-21-1987) 9-4-34: POINT OF LIABILITY FOR MAINTENANCE: Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 28 of31 \ A. User Responsibility: All users shall have the responsibility of, and be liable for, and shall pay for, all costs and expenses of maintaining their own sewer service lines extending from their property improvement (i.e. house or building) until such sewer lines pass the vertical plane of the user's property line. This maintenance liability of the user includes ensuring that the entire sewer service line from the property line to the sewer main is clear and free from obstructions. The City shall be responsible for the structural repair of the portion of the sewer service line located in the public right- of-way or outside the property which the sewer service is serving. B. Nonconflicting Provisions: This Section shall not be construed to be in conflict with Section 9-4-33 of this Chapter, which states that no person shall be allowed to dig into the street, alley, sidewalk or easement beneath which the lateral and trunk line sewers run or tap into any such lateral or trunk line in any manner without the Public Works Department's authorization. Any such person must also obtain permission from other entities holding jurisdiction over the public right-of-way or the easement grantor to perform work within the street, alley, sidewalk or easement for which the user is liable. (Ord. 477, 4~21-1987) 9M4M35: USERS LIABLE FOR VIOLATION: No user ofthe City sewer service shall permit or allow any person from any other premises or any unauthorized person to discharge sewage into said system and the permit to connect with the sewer system shall be limited to the person and the premises designated in the permit. Any violation of this Section by either the permit holder or an unauthorized person shall be deemed a misdemeanor. Any such violations shall be grounds for the Superintendent to withhold sewer service, without notice of termination of service, and the Superintendent may require the Water Superintendent to terminate water service. In appropriate circumstances the Superintendent may require that a separate service connection is put in for each user. (Ord. 477, 4-21-1987) 9M4M36: CITY NOT LIABLE FOR DAMAGE OR SERVICE INTERRUPTION: The City shall not be held liable for damages to any sewer user or his property by reason ofa stoppage or other interruption ofms water supply or sewer disposal service caused by scarcity of water, accidents to the works, alterations, additions, or repairs to the sewer or water system or from other unavoidable causes beyond the control ofthe City. (Ord. 477,4-21-1987) 9-4-37: INJURY TO SEWER SYSTEM UNLAWFUL: A Damaging Property: No unauthorized person shall maliciously, willfully or negligently break, damage, destroy, uncover, deface or tamper with any structure, appurtenance or equipment which is a part of the sewer works. B. Depositing Garbage: It shall be unlawful for any person to deposit any garbage, rubbish, sod, lawn clippings and yard debris, construction materials, dead animals or Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 29 of31 any substance, liquid or solid, having a tendency to obstruct the flow of the sewer in any manhole, cleanout or sewer opening, or which is prohibited by any other portion of this chapter, the pretreatment regulations at Chapter 2 of this Title, or any state or federal regulation. 9-4-38: PENALTIES: A. Notice Of Violation; Responsibility For Remedy: Any person found to be violating any provisions of this Chapter, other than for nonpayment of a sewer bill, shall be served by the City with a written notice stating the nature of the violation and providing three (3) working days for the satisfactOlY correction thereof. The offender shall, within the period of time stated in such notice, permanently cease all violations and if necessary make all corrections and repairs to the system or pay for same if the City has to make the correction(s) or repair(s). B. Penalty Imposed: Any person who shall continue any violation, beyond the time limit provided for hereinabove in this Section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, on conviction thereof, shall be subject to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or imprisonment not exceeding thirty (30) days, or both such fine and imprisonment, for each violation. Each day in which such violation shall continue shall be deemed a separate offense. (Ord. 795, 7-7-1998) C. Liability To City For Loss Or Damage: Any person violating any of the provisions of this Chapter shall become liable to the City for any expense, loss, or damage occasioned by the City by reason of such violation and, for other than nonpayment of sewer bill violations, may have their sewer and water supply terminated after the above three (3) working day notice period has expired. D. Cumulative Penalties: These penalties shall not be construed to be exclusive but shall be construed to be cumulative of, and in addition to, any other penalties provided for in this Code or the Criminal Code of the State; as an example, a person injuring the sewer system could be criminally charged with malicious injury to property for all violations initially charged as a criminal violation., the notice provisions provided for in this Chapter shall not apply. (Ord. 795, 7-7-1998) SECTION 3: All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 4: VALIDITY: The Meridian City Council hereby declares that any section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Ordinance as adopted and amended herein be declared for any reason to be invalid it is the intent of the Meridian City Council that it would have passed all other portions oftrus Ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any portion as may be declared invalid. SECTION 5: SAVINGS CLAUSE: This Ordinance does not affect an action or proceeding commenced or right accrued before this Ordinance takes effect. Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 30 of31 { SECTION 6: DATE OF EFFECT: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 6~ day of t?cfl;~, 2004. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this o-!JJ day of t?&h ~ ,2004. A nEST: SEAL !"J :: ~ ,rf' 0 g An Ordinance of the City ofMerid~J}~: . 11 ~~ri Jr., City Clerk First Reading: !(}-!)-&f- "'''''''/'''''' COUNT'<. ....\",...' Adopted after first reading by suspension'Sftthe RuUt~s allowed pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: YES X NO Second Reading: Third Reading: STATE OF IDAHO,) : ss. County of Ada. ) On this Sf"- day of Oc/-o (tY- ,2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAM:MY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the d~~ and year first above written. ",.11" ua.." .' L "". ...."'''' \C"B . 8 A_ #.. .,," ~~ .......~' "~c..~......")....... .....~.... ..,,;....~ -:;. l ~01/. ~ e . , L ;': ...... (SEAL\ \,p c.:' Y PUBLIC FOR IDAHO t {fl~c."" (TBL'- ",," j ING AT: JJ1pr/tlt'tlPr ~ .... ". 0" C .... I j ........ -11';,........ ~~ ",..... COMMISSION EXPIRES: tJch::u.y 07 ..'".c OF I\) "'...."'.. 7 ---, '11,.. ."., Z:\Work\M\Mer:idian\MeA~~ 15360M\Ordinances City HaU\2004 Ord\SeweT Ilse and service regulations revision October 2004.doc ,~ Sewer Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 31 of31 NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO Le. ~ 50-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 04- /1 tJ ~ PROVIDING FOR REPEAL AND RE-ENACTMENT OF SEWER USE AND SERVICE REGULATIONS. This ordinance of the City of Meridian repeals Chapter 4 of Title 9 of the Meridian City Code concerning Sewer Use and Service regulations, and re-enacts a new Chapter 1, Title 9. The new chapter contains purpose, definitions, jurisdiction, mandatory use, how application for service is made and processed, determines where City liability for sewer service lines begins and ends, regulates sewer service connections and sewer lines, workmanship, backfilling and surface repair, right of entry for inspection, sewer main extensions, assessments and fees, cooperative and reimbursement agreements, how sewer charges are calculated, sewer user and equivalent connection appraisals, when service can be extended outside of the City limits, when charges are due and when late charges may be assessed, billing and collection, effects of delinquent accounts, disconnection of sewer service for nonpayment, establishment of a sewer fund within the enterprise fund, regulates private sewer systems, limits City liability for service interruptions, regulates special charges, sewer inspections and septic tank waste dumping, sewer use restrictions as well as post locations, protects sewer system, prohibits the waste of sewer, makes users liable for violation of the ordinance and provides penalties for violations. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, C~ of Meridian, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance shall become effective on the Y - day of ec-~ ~ 2004. CIty of Meridian Mayor and City Council By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk SEAL 7. p) 'C- c-Q1 '" ....~ 0 .$ ~ 7'/\ ~'S'1S\' ~ ~ ""0 ~" First Reading: / t7 - => - tJ /- "/"/////1 ?OUf\rr'f . ~,;",v' Adopted after first reading by suspension of the I Rule as ''ali owed pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: YES >< NO Second Reading: Third Reading: Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 1 5360M\Oedinaoces City Hal1\2004 Ord\Sewer use and service Sum Oed October 2004.doc Sewer Use and Service Regulation Revision Summary Page 1 ofl October 1, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 5, 2004 ITEM NO. 20 REQUEST Ordinance -- Water Use and Service Revision AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: See attached Ordinance {t & b t}/ o Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 04- II ()~ BY: (J1i~/e ;&JvIv7Y.e.e.. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING EXISTING WATER USE AND SERVICE REGULATIONS CODIFIED AT CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 9 OF THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE; RE-ENACTING A NEW CHAPTER 1 OF TITLE 9 OF THE MERIDIAN CITY CODE TO BE KNOWN AS WATER USE AND SERVICE REGULATIONS, INCLUDING PURPOSE, DEFINITIONS, AUTHORITY, MANDATORY USE, APPLICATION FOR SERVICE, POINT OF LIABILITY FOR MAINTENANCE, WATER SERVICE CONNECTIONS AND WATER LINES, WORKMANSHIP, BACKFILLING AND SURFACE REPAIR, RIGHT OF ENTRY FOR INSPECTIONS OR TESTING, WATER MAIN EXTENSIONS, ASSESSMENTS AND FEES, COOPERATIVE OR REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS, BASIS FOR WATER CHARGES, WATER USER AND EQUIVALENT CONNECTION APPRAISAL, CONNECTION TO PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF THE CITY LIMITS, BOARD OF APPRAISERS, MONTHLY RATES, DUE DATE FOR PAYMENT AND LATE CHARGES, DELINQUENCIES, RESUMPTION OF WATER SERVICE AFTER TURN OFF FOR NONPAYMENT, AUTHORITY TO AMEND REGULA TIONS, WATER FUND ESTABLISHMENT, PRIVATE WATER SYSTEMS, WATER LINE DEVELOPMENT, ADOPTION OF WATER PLANS, PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, NONLIABILITY FOR WATER SHORT AGES, LAWN SPRINKLING AND USE RESTRICTIONS, LIMITATION ON LOCATION OF POSTS, FIRE HYDRANTS, PROTECTION OF PIPES AND METERS, WASTE OF WATER OR INJURY TO WATER SYSTEM, USER LIABILITY, PENAL TIES, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT, VALIDITY, SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO: Section 1: Chapter 1 of Title 9 is repealed. Section 2: Title 9, Chapter 1 is re-enacted and shall read as follows: Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 1 of 29 9-1-1: PURPOSE: It is hereby determined and declared to be necessary and conducive to and for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the public and inhabitants of the City, and for the purpose of controlling the use and connection to, and for providing an equitable distribution of the costs and expenses of maintenance, operation, upkeep and repair of the entire Municipal water system which includes the water supply, water storage and water distribution facilities of the City, to charge and collect service charges or fees upon all lots, lands, property and premises served or benefited by the Municipal water system of the City, which system and facilities consists generally of all wells, storage reservoirs, transmission mains, structures, buildings, cWorination facilities, valves, service connections, service meters, fittings, mechanical equipment and all other facilities as required for the furnishing and distribution of water as a public system to the citizens of the City; and to provide for the control, use and administration of the installation of private domestic water systems where a public water system is not available. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-2: DEFINITIONS: Unless the context specifically indicates otherwise, the meanings of terms used in this Chapter shall be as follows: AUTHORIZED WATER USER: Any person making authorized and proper use ofthe Municipal water system and/or the water delivered thereby and who has made application for water service and such application has been granted and has paid for such service, water, and all fees required. An authorized water user may be an owner, his tenant by lease or rental, a developer, etc. CITY: Refers to the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, or its authorized or designated agent, representative or deputy thereto. CITY WATER SERVICE LINE: That portion of any individual water service line that runs from its connection with the public water main to, and including, the corporation stop, valve box and meter that is installed in the service line. It will usually be installed within the limits ofthe public right of way or utility easement and, after approved installation, it is to be owned and maintained by the City. EQUIVALENT CONNECTION: The service to a typical residential house on an individual lot that is occupied by an average single-family dwelling is designated as one equivalent connection. All other connections are prorated in relation to equivalent connections based on the estimated usage of or benefit derived from the service. MASTER WATER PLAN: The Master Water Plan is any document which the City of Meridian has accepted by official action of the City Council which describes or otherwise indicates an overall view of proposed future water system needs, minimum water main sizing, and/or minimum water main spacing and routing. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 2 of29 MONTH: A "month" as used herein shall mean the period between scheduled water meter readings. The City will, as nearly as possible, schedule the water meter readings thirty (30) days apart. MULTIPLE BUILDlNG DEVELOPMENT: Includes the various types of developments that would have common or joint ownership areas such as condominiums, townhouses, mobile home parks or courts, shopping centers, professional offices, etc. MUNICIP AL WATER SYSTEM: Includes all components and facilities of the public water system that are owned, operated, or maintained by the City of Meridian, Idaho, for domestic and other uses. OVERSIZED MAlN: Any water main which is required to have a larger inside diameter than is necessary based on the estimated flow of the service area for which the main is being installed. OWNER: Refers to the property owner that is served by the Municipal water system or desires to be served by the Municipal water system. PERSON: Any individual, firm, company, association, society, corporation or group. PRIVATE FIRE SERVICE CONNECTION: A separate and independent connection from the Municipal water main that connects directly to a sprinkler system or fire-control device that has been, or is to be, installed in any building for the purpose of fire control within the specific building and said connection is to be for no other purpose. PRIVATE WATER SERVICE LINE: The portion of the water service line that runs from the building being served to the point of connection with the water meter. PRIVATE WATER SYSTEM: Any water system for domestic use that is not owned, operated and maintained by the City of Meridian, Idaho. PROPERTY: Refers to all property, whether privately or publicly owned, within the service limits of the Municipal water system excluding therefrom lands that have been dedicated for public street or highway rights of way. PUBLIC WATER SERVICE LINE: See definition of City Water Service Line in this Section. SHALL/MAY: "Shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive. SPRINKLER IRRIGATION: Refers to any system for the purpose of watering lawns, gardens, shrubs, trees, etc., as they are normally grown in the out-of-doors or open spaces. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 3 of29 SUPERINTENDENT: The Superintendent of the City Waterworks is the individual appointed by the City Council to be in charge of, and oversee, the water system; he shall, under the direction of the City Engineer and City Council, have charge of the Municipal water supply system. The Superintendent's duties shall include but not be limited to: maintenance, operation, supervision and/or inspection of all additions or modifications. The Superintendent shall report, on a regular basis, to the City Engineer the condition of the Municipal water system. UNAUTHORIZED WATER USER: Any person who makes any use of the Municipal water system or the water delivered thereby who is not an authorized water user or who improperly or illegally uses the water system, or who causes damage or injury to the system in any fashion. UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE: The most currently adopted edition of the Uniform Plumbing Code. WATER MAIN: Any pipe line owned by the City for the purpose of transportation and/or distribution of water to serve more than one water service line or user. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975; amd. Ord. 374, 7-7-1980; Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-3: APPLICATION OF CHAPTER; CITY AUTHORITY: A. Application: The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all property within the corporate limits of the City, and any special users outside of the corporate limits of the City, including all property owned or occupied by the United States of America, the state ofldaho, and Ada County. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) B. City Authority: The water system for the supply of the City shall be under the sole and exclusive control of the mayor and council, who may, from time to time, direct the construction of such works, placing of mains, service pipes and fire hydrants, as the necessities of the City may require. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-4: USE OF CITY WATER REQUIRED: A. Connection To City System: The owner or occupant of any house, building or property used for residential, commercial, industrial, govermnental or recreational use, or any other purpose, situated within the City which is abutting on or having a permanent right of access to any street, alley or right of way in which there is located a City water line is hereby required to cease using any other water system and at his expense to connect such building directly with the City water in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, within sixty (60) calendar days after the date of official notice from the City to do so; provided, however, that said City water is within three hundred feet (300') of any property line where said building to be served is located. B. DiscolUlection Of Private System Required: At such time as the Municipal water system becomes available to the property served by the private water system, and the Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 4 of 29 owner or tenant connects his property to Municipal service as required, it is mandatory that the private water supply is not connected or cross connected in any way to the water lines served by the City water system. The disconnection of the private water supply line shall be inspected and approved by the waterworks superintendent or his designated representative. (Ord. 622, 10-5-1993) 9-1-5: APPLICATION FOR WATER SUPPLY: A. Application Required: Whenever any person desires to obtain a supply of water from the City waterworks, he shall apply to the Public Works Department for service and agree to be governed by such rules and regulations not inconsistent with this chapter, as may be prescribed by the mayor and City Council for the control of the water supply. B. Contents Of Application; Grant Of Application: 1. New Construction: The applicant must state the location, type of building, and uses therein, and fully and truly state the purpose for which the water is to be used, and shall furnish a set offIoor plans showing all water uses and a site plan if the water is to be used for irrigation. If the application is granted, the Public Works Department may authorize the extension, at the expense of the applicant, and at no expense to the City, the service pipe and meter tile, meter yoke, meter tile lid, curb stop and any other fittings that are necessary to install service to the inside line of the curb at the point most convenient for supplying the applicant. 2. Existing Water Service: In the case of an existing water service connection, if the real property or improvement is sold or otherwise transferred, the person entitled to possession shall make application to the Municipal Billing Department to transfer the account, and shall supply the department with all information requested by the department. 3. Third Party Billing: After establishing an account for water service, a property owner may direct that a third party, such as a property management company, or a tenant, receive the billing for water, sewer, and solid waste collection services. The third party to whom the billings are sent shall also execute such documentation as is necessary to confirm the billing information. In the event such an account becomes delinquent, the Municipal Billing Department shall send a delinquency notice to the billing recipient, and the owner, at the addresses contained in the agreements. The City will charge a third party billing account set up fee which must be paid at the time of the application. The fee will be set by resolution of the City Council. The third party billing agreement shall also provide that the property owner remains primarily responsible for charges assessed to the account, and further, that all unpaid charges constitute a lien against the real property. An owner may appoint an agent, to act for the owner, to establish an account, receive billings, or do anything else an owner may do, or be required to do, pursuant to this code. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 5 of29 C. Street Paving: In cases where street paving is contemplated, the abutting property owners must either connect their premises with the water mains before the trench is backfilled or pay the cost of service from the main to curb if made thereafter. (Ord. 03-1044,9-23-2003) 9-1-6: POINT OF LIABILITY FOR MAINTENANCE: A. User Responsibility: All users shall have the responsibility of, and be liable for, and shall pay for, all costs and expenses of maintaining their own water service line(s) extending from the property improvement to a point of connection to the water meter yoke. This point of connection may be inside or outside of the meter tile depending on the length of the meter yoke tail. The City's responsibility for maintenance of the individual user service line(s) extends from the point of connection at the water main to the point of connection of the yoke to the property improvement service line. B. Damage To Water System: Responsibility for damage to the City water system is as outlined in subsection 9-l-34B ofthis chapter. C. Nonconflicting Provisions: This section shall not be construed to be in conflict with section 9-1-33 of this chapter. (Ord. 565, 12-3-1991) 9-1-7: WATER SERVICE CONNECTIONS AND WATER LINES: All materials and workmanship in the installation of private water service lines and connections to the City water service line shall conform to the following regulations: (Ord. 273,1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) A. Permit Required: No person other than one authorized by the City shall uncover, make any connections with or opening into, use, alter, or disturb any Municipal water main, City water service line or appurtenance thereof without first obtaining a written permit from the City. The permit is not to be used until all water installation charges and fees have been paid in full. (Ord. 374, 7-7-1980) B. Application For Permit; Fees: To obtain Municipal water service, the owner or his agent shall make application on a special form furnished by the City. The permit application shall be supplemented by any plans, specifications, or other information considered pertinent in the judgment of the City and requested by the City. A permit and inspection fee as established by resolution ofthe City Council shall be paid to the City at the time the application is filed. The owner or his agent shall pay a assessment fees to the City at the time the application is filed. The amount of the assessment fees will vary depending on the equivalent residential unit (ERU) rating, or other rating established by the City Engineer for the user in question. The assessment fees shall be as established by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 02-967, 7-23-2002) C. Service Line Installation: The owner may request permission from the City to install the water service line, including tap to the City water main, City stop valve, service Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 6 of29 line, valve, meter vault and cover under private contract. Such installation shall be in conformance with the plumbing code as adopted by the City l(See title 10, chapter 2 of this code). When installation of a water service line and appurtenances causes damage to any property, public or private, other than the owner's property, the owner shall be responsible for all repair costs including, but not limited to, repair to streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, sewer lines, irrigation facilities, storm drains, lawns, fences, gas lines, other water mains, telephone lines and electrical lines. (Ord. 476, 4-21- 1987) D. Old Private Service Lines: Old private water service lines may be used in cOlUlection with new buildings only when they are found, on examination and being tested as required by the City, to meet all requirements of this chapter. E. Conformance With Building And Plumbing Codes; Inspection: 1. The materials of construction of the private water service line and the methods to be used in excavating, placing of the pipe, jointing, testing, and backfilling the trench shall all conform to the requirements of the building and plumbing codes as have been or may be adopted by the City 6 (See title 10, chapters 1 and 2-ofthis code). 2. The private water service cOlUlection to the City water service line shall conform to the requirements ofthe building and plumbing codes as adopted by the City. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) 3. All cOlUlections to or extensions of the service line, as previously installed by the City, or under its authorization, shall be made in accordance with the requirements of the Uniform Plumbing Code for such an installation. The cOlUlection ofthe service line shall be inspected by the City Plumbing Inspector before the installation is backfilled and before the water is turned on for use at the premises. (Ord. 374, 7-7- 1980) F. Service Line Size And Location: 1. The private water service line from the building to the cOlUlection with the City water service line shall not be smaller than a three-fourths inch (3/411) inside diameter pipe and shall be laid in a trench of such depth so that the minimum cover over the pipe from the finished grade shall be three feet (3'). 2. The alignment ofthe private water service line from the outlet of the building to the City water service line shall be reasonably straight and shall be located such that the distance between the water service line and the sewer service line shall be a minimum of ten feet (10'). G. Cross-Connection Prohibited: No person shall make or permit the cross-colUlection of any private water supply to a water line that is served by the Municipal water system ;B (See also Chapter 3 of this Title). Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 7 of29 H. Notify City For Inspection: The applicant for the City water service line permit shall notify the City when the connection of the private water service line to the City water service line is ready for inspection. 1. Excavations Guarded; Restoration: All excavations for all water service installations shall be adequately guarded with barricades and lights so as to protect the public from hazard. Streets, sidewalks, parkways, and other public property disturbed in the course of the work shall be restored in a manner satisfactory to the City or the entity having jurisdiction over the disturbed property. J. Private Fire Service Connection: The installation of a private fire service connection shall comply in all respects to the requirements for a City water service line and the owner, or his agent, will be required to pay all costs for connection and extension of the facility from the Municipal water main. The connection of a private fire service connection shall be made in accordance with International Fire Code. K. Connections Made By Plumber: The connection of the private water service line to the public water service line to the Municipal water main shall be made by a plumber holding a valid State plumber's license. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) L. Meter, Stop Valve And Stopcock: 1. A separate and independent City water service meter and stop valve shall be provided for every authorized water user. (Ord. 374, 7-7-1980) 2. To each service pipe there shall be attached at the inside line ofthe curb a stopcock and key box which shall be paid for by the water user and be under the exclusive control of the Superintendent ofthe Waterworks. (1955 Code S 5-106) 9-1-8: REJECTION OF MATERIALS OR WORKMANSHIP: The City may reject any materials or workmanship for cause and upon such, the rejected material shall be removed and replaced with approved material. Disapproved workmanship shall cause the removal and replacement of all materials involved, including appurtenances such as excavations, backfilling and other work items. (Ord. 476,4-21-1987) 9-1-9: BACKFILLING AND SURFACE REPAIR: A. Owner Responsibility; Costs: All backfilling and surface repair required by a water service installation shall be the ownerts responsibility. B. Work Under Private Contract: When the owner has the water service installation done under private contract, the costs for surface repair shall be the owner's responsibility and shall not be included in any fee, charge or rate imposed by the City. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 8 of29 C. Confonnance With Special Specifications; Inspection And Approval: All surface repair and backfilling shall conform to special specifications promulgated by the City for water line installation and shall be subject to inspection by and approval ofthe City, and Ada County Highway District. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) 9-1-10: RIGHT OF ENTRY FOR INSPECTIONS OR TESTING: A. Free access to all places supplied with water, at all reasonable hours, shall be allowed the Public Works Director, Water Superintendent, Assistant Water Superintendent, City Engineer, or their designee to examine the apparatus, the amount used, and the malUler of use of the same, and any water user violating any ofthe rules and regulations controlling the water supply shall be subject to penalty as provided for in Section 9-1-36 of this Chapter. (Ord. 476,4-21-1987; amd. 1999 Code) B. The City through its authorized representative bearing proper credentials and identification shall be permitted, during proper and reasonable hours of the day, to enter all properties, premises or buildings to which water is furnished from the Municipal water system for testing or for any other purpose necessary for the proper administration of the water system in accordance with the provisions ofthis Chapter. Also, the City through its authorized representative bearing proper credentials and identification shall be permitted to enter all private properties through which the City holds a duly negotiated easement for the purpose of, but not limited to, inspection, observation, repair, and maintenance of any portion of the Municipal water system lying within said easement. All entry and subsequent work, if any, on said easement shall be done in full accordance with the terms of the duly negotiated easement pertaining to the private property involved. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-11: WATER MAIN EXTENSIONS: A. Permit Required: No extensions of service pipes shall be made without first obtaining a pennit therefor from the Public Works Department, and each building shall have separate service pipes. B. Compliance With City Policies; Responsibility For Costs: All proposed extensions of the Municipal water system to serve undeveloped areas within the existing corporate limits, newly annexed areas or areas outside the corporate limits shall comply with existing water system extension policies and with the overall Master Plan for the City's Municipal water supply system. Costs for all extensions to any property shall be the responsibility of that property owner or his agent. Cost for water service extensions within the property for which the extension is requested shall also be the responsibility of the owner or his agent. When it is necessary to install oversized mains as part of an extension, the cost of all oversized lines may be the responsibility ofthe owner or his agent. Such water line extensions, public or private, shall be extended to the farthest boundary of the development project or property to be served by the extension. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 9 of29 C. Fire Hydrants And Service Lines: It shall also be the property owner's or his agent's responsibilities to install all necessary fire hydrants and City water service lines for all extensions of the Municipal water system at no expense to the City. Unless a special permit is granted by the City, all Municipal water system extensions, including the City water service lines, to newly developing areas shall be installed prior to the construction of any new streets. D. Approval Of Plans: All design and construction of any extensions to the Municipal water system shall comply with the official specifications as adopted by the City for the water distribution system. The plans for all extensions to the Municipal water system shall be prepared and signed by a registered professional engineer as per the licensing requirements of the Idaho Code and said plans shall be filed with the City. In approving a plan for extension to the Municipal water system, the City reserves the right to stipulate other requirements such as a special permit fee, rights-of-way limits, sequence of construction, time limits for having existing service disrupted, the provision of surety guaranteeing completion and other similar measures as may be required to protect the public. No work shall commence on any such extension of the Municipal water system until the extension project has been approved by the City and the State ofIdaho Department of Environmental Quality. E. Certification By Engineer: After the construction ofthe Municipal water system extensions, it shall be the obligation of the owner, or his agent, to have a registered professional engineer verify to the City that the said system extensions were installed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer. Following certification by the registered professional engineer and acceptance by the City, the entire extension ofthe Municipal water system, including the City water service lines, shall become the property of the City and it shall be the Citis responsibility to maintain and operate the system thereafter. F. Work Done By Contractor: The installation of all public water systems shall be performed and completed by a contractor possessing a valid State of Idaho public works license with the proper endorsement for the work. 9-1-12: ASSESSMENT AND OTHER FEES: A. Assessment Fees. Notwithstanding any ofthe provisions of this Chapter, any person or property owner who has not otherwise paid for, or contributed proportionately toward, the costs and expenses of constructing a water line, whether that construction has been performed by the City, a local improvement district or a private entity, or combination thereof, and who subsequently desires to connect to the City water system, shall be required to pay, in addition to the required monthly user charges of Section 9-1-19 of this Chapter, an additional connection charge which shall be known and referred to as the "water assessment feel!. The water assessment fee shall be computed on an "equivalent residential unit", or "ERU" basis. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 10 of29 B. Fee Set By City Council: The water assessment fee for each parcel of ground connected to a water main shall be established and set by the City Council. The water assessment fee may be different for residential, commercial, and industrial uses and may be different for differing uses within those three (3) classifications depending upon the considerations referenced above but shall be as consistent as possible under similar factual circumstances. The water assessment fee shall be assessed in terms of single-family equivalent connections. (Ord. 483, 6-16-1987) C. Meter Fee. The City shall establish and charge a meter fee from all users initiating new water service or changing water meter size to cover the costs of the City providing, installing and maintaining a water meter into the meter box provided by the water user. D. Adaptor Fee. The City shall establish and charge fee for providing the fittings necessary to install a size of meter not equivalent to the size of the meter setter (Le. "yoke") previously installed by the developer, owner or user. A different sized meter will be installed only at the request of the user. E. Other Fees. The City shall establish and charge a fee to any user's water account for repair of damages to the water meter and its appurtenances including, but not limited to, the lid, padlocks, valves, and transmitters. 9-1-13: COOPERATIVE OR REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENTS: A. Reimbursement To Water User: Should a water user at his own expense construct an extension to the water system, consisting of twelve (12) inch diameter or larger water main, in a public right of way or easement with prior approval of the City and in accordance with the standards and designs of the City and which water line extension has been determined by the City to be able to benefit properties other than the user's, the water user constructing the extension may be reimbursed a portion of the costs of extending the twelve-inch diameter or larger water line from the connection charges collected under Section 9-1-12 of this Chapter if any of the following apply: 1. The water main extension is twelve (12) inch diameter or larger. 2. The water main extension is required to be twelve inch diameter or larger to serve adjacent properties. B. To be eligible for reimbursement, the user must: 1. Design the water extension in substantial accordance with the policies of the City of Meridian and its Master Water Plan; 2. Receive City approval of the water extension construction plans; 3. Construct the water extension in accordance with approved plans and City of Meridian standard specifications and details; 4. Solicit and receive three (3) bids for the water extension and select the lowest responsive bid as determined in a bid opening. The user must notify the Public Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 11 of29 Works Department of the bid opening forty-eight (48) hours in advance and provide the opportunity for a Public Works Department representative to attend the bid opening during normal working hours; 5. Receive preliminary plat approval from City Council for the development to be served by the water extension. Water extensions intended to serve non- subdivision projects, and for which the developer seeks a reimbursement agreement, must receive approval for a reimbursement agreement from City Council prior to construction plan approval by the City. C. Developer Reimbursement Agreements The City shall not be required to enter into such a reimbursement agreement and whether or not to enter into such an agreement shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council; provided however, that: 1. No reimbursement agreement shall have a duration greater than ten (10) years unless the City is a beneficiary of the agreement unless extended by the City CounciL 2. No reimbursement agreement shall pay to the water user paying for or constructing a water line extension more than one hundred percent (100%) of his actual engineering and construction costs, it being noted that in most cases at least some ofthe cost would ordinarily be assessed to the water user's own property. 3. A reimbursement agreement may provide for interest to be paid to the water user. 4. The City may charge and may receive a five percent (5%) administrative fee against the amount reimbursable to the water user administration, accounting, auditing, and payment ofthe reimbursement payments made to the water user so extending the water line and having reached a reimbursement agreement with the City. 5. All or a part of the water construction equivalency fee associated with the water line constructed and paid pursuant to Section 9-1-12 of this Chapter may be set aside and earmarked for reimbursement pursuant to a reimbursement agreement. 6. The reimbursement agreement shall be personal to the water user entering into it and shall not be assigned without the written consent of the City, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. 7. The agreement will terminate when the user has been fully reimbursed if the agreed upon reimbursement amount is paid prior to the end of the term of the agreement. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 12 of29 8. The agreement shall be binding on the water user and his assigns, successors, heirs, and executors and may be recorded as an encumbrance against the property of the water user. 9. The water user shall be required to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any and all liability whatsoever until the water line has been accepted for maintenance by the City. 10. Said lines, after acceptance, shall become part ofthe City water system and be the sole property of the City. D. Methods of Reimbursement Depending on the amount to be reimbursed to the water user, the agreement will include one or more of the following reimbursement mechanisms: 1. A portion of the water assessment fees owed or paid by the user as required under 9-1-12(B). 2. Reimbursement of a portion of the water system assessment fees received by the City from others that connect to the water main adjacent to the user's property or project. E. Amount of Reimbursement 1. Section- Line Road Water Main Extensions. For water main extensions, twel ve- inch diameter or larger, in section-line roadways, the reimbursement amount shall be based on the actual construction cost, and may include reasonable engineering, surveying, construction staking, license agreement, and project management costs. The allowable reimbursement percentages are: Table 1. Reimbursement for Water Main Construction in Section-Line Roadways Reimbursement Percenta e 50% 90% or Project 2. On-site Water Main Extensions. For water main extensions on-site that are ten- inch diameter or larger, the reimbursement amount shall be based on the percentages in the following table: Table 2. Reimbursement for On-Site, Over-sized Water Main Construction Water Main Size, Inches Reimbursement Percentage 10 28% 12 40% 14 Evaluated on an Individual Basis Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 13 of29 16 Evaluated on an Individual Basis F. Reimbursement To City: Where the City constructs a water line extension, either on its own or in conjunction with another person or entity, the City may establish a fee such that the City is reimbursed for its costs of construction, engineering, legal costs and interest. (Ord. 483, 6-16-1987) 9-1-14: BASIS FOR AUTHORIZED WATER USER CHARGES: A. System Established: There is hereby established a system of periodic service charges and fees for the authorized use of, and for service rendered by the Municipal water system of the City, and which charges and fees shall be as near as possible, uniform as to the different users served by said Municipal water system. The rates, charges and fees provided by this chapter are hereby levied and assessed against the authorized water user or owner, and his property, having any water service connection with the Municipal water system of the City. B. Property Subject To Charges: It is specifically enacted that all improved property in the City to which the Municipal water system is available, but is not used by the owner or occupier of said parcel of land, is still subject to user charges under the provisions of this chapter to cover the cost of standby fire protection facilities and other benefits. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-15: WATER USER AND EQUIVALENT CONNECTION APPRAISAL: Each user and parcel being subject to water user charges as provided for hereinabove shall be appraised and assessed for the purpose of establishing the equivalent connection rating and the monthly service charge or fee, to be charged or assessed to and against the property. In making such appraisement and assessment, there shall be taken into consideration the estimated volume of water to be used, the uniformity ofthe use of the water, the standby benefits of the water system for fire protection and for other factors so as to as nearly as possible fix the rate, charge or fee upon the same relative basis as is imposed upon other like property within the City that has the Municipal water service available. (Ord. 476,4-21-1987) 9-1-16: CONNECTION TO CITY WATER SYSTEM OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS: In order to obtain Municipal water system service to parcel(s) which are either partially or entirely outside ofthe corporate City limits the following provisions must be complied with: A. There shall be an application form which shall provide that the applicant will agree to the terms and conditions required by this section as a consideration for obtaining such service. The City Council shall establish an application fee by resolution or as Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 14 of29 recommended by the Public Works Director given the amount of staff review required for processing the application. The application form shall specify the legal description of the parcel(s) for which service is being applied, the name and address of the legal owner(s) of the parcel(s) and purpose of the requested service. B. A completed application must be filed with the public works department. C. Following the filing of an application and the payment of the application fee, the Public Works Director shall then review the circumstances presented by the application in accordance with the terms and conditions and regulations ofthis chapter as are relevant to the application and which shall also include a review of the effect the granting of the application will have on the ability of the Municipal water system to provide an acceptable level of service to developed parcels with existing service within the City limits which shall not be compromised. D. The Public Works Director, or his designee, shall then review the findings and recommendations with the applicant for comment. E. The Public Works Director shall then submit the application and a report of recommendation(s) to the City Council regarding the application. F. The City Council, in the exercise of its discretion may either grant or deny the application after review ofthe application and the report ofrecommendation(s) of the Public Works Director. G. In the event the council grants the application it shall include as a condition that the legal owner(s) of the parcel(s) shall enter into an "Agreement for the Extension of Domestic Water Service Outside the City Limits" (hereinafter in this section referred to as the "Agreement") which agreement form shall provide that the legal owner(s) of the parcel(s) agree that the provisions of the City's ordinances, regulations, and policies, and inspection fees, which appertain to the regulation, control and use of its domestic water system including hookup, service fees as apply to terms of the II agreement II and which form shall also provide that the owner(s) of the parcel(s) agree to the annexation into the City of the parcel(s) serviced; and the council may also impose such other conditions of granting the application as are reasonable to assure the protection of the level of service to developed parcels within the City limits and to assure that the proprietary funds of the City domestic water service are not used for the extension and/or enlargement of the system which conditions shall also be included in the "agreement". H. The water user of the parcel(s) serviced pursuant to a granted application under this section shall be considered a user and subject to the terms and conditions of the "agreement11 so long as the property being served remains outside of the corporate limits of the City. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 15 of29 L Notwithstanding subsection E of this section, if the requested connection is for a residence, or a multi-family residence not exceeding four (4) residential units, and if water service is readily available to the affected parcel without extension of service, then, if the Public Works Director deems it in the best interests of the City to do so, said connection may be authorized by the Public Works Director without action by the City CounciL If the director declines to approve the connection, the request will proceed to the City Council for final decision. (Ord. 01-910,2-27-2001) 9-1-17: BOARD OF APPRAISERS: A. Board Created: There is hereby created the Board of Appraisers, consisting of three (3) members, to be the same persons as the Mayor, the City Clerk and the Public Works Director. B. Duties: The Board of Appraisers shall be delegated the duty of hearing any disputes, objections or appeals by a sewer user regarding assessment fees, monthly user charges or other fees established by this chapter. 9-1-18: PURPOSE OF MONTHLY WATER USER CHARGE: The monthly water user charge is established to cover operation and maintenance costs of the system, and to provide a fund to pay for repairs and replacements ofthe system, increase efficiencies, meet State ofIdaho or federal requirements, or redemption of bonds that have been used to finance system improvements, all as a part of the City's responsibility to provide adequate domestic water service and facilities for the City. The monthly water user charge as described herein, or as amended, shall be effective immediately upon acceptance and passage of the ordinance codified in this chapter, or an amending ordinance, and monthly user charge billing under the rates described herein shall begin at the end of the first calendar month following acceptance of this chapter. For new connections, the water user charge is to begin when the connection to the City service line has been inspected and approved or within sixty (60) days after the City service line has been installed, whichever is the earliest. (Ord. 476,4-21-1987) 9-1-19: MONTHLY RATES: A. User Fees: 1. All owners who receive or have the right to receive the benefit of the Municipal water system shall, in return for said benefit, pay monthly user fees as established by resolution of the City CounciL The montWy user fee shall be based on the amount of water used and the amount of fire and health protection provided by the Municipal water supply system. 2. Monthly fixed cost fees and user fees shall be established by resolution of the City CounciL (Ord. 02-967, 7-23-2002) Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 16 of29 3. Each owner will pay a monthly user fee based on the quantity of water used. Each owner shall pay, as full compensation for the benefits derived from the Municipal water supply system, the fees as established by resolution ofthe City Council. Should an owner request a City water service line to be disconnected, for any reason, there shall be no fee paid to the City. However, the owner must request the City to place the line back in service. There will be a charge as established by resolution ofthe City Council associated with the reactivation of the existing service line. All monthly water rates will be charged against the property for which the City water service line is installed. The owner of record is liable for that amount, which must be paid before the water service is resumed. In the event an owner leaves an unclaimed balance in his account, that amount shall be kept for six (6) months after which time it shall revert to the enterprise fund of the City. B. Fees For Water Use: 1. The fees for water use shall be as established by resolution of the City Council. 2. In case a water meter fails to correctly register the water used, the owner shall pay for the water on the basis of the average reading of the meter for the previous three (3) months. Water meter installation fees shall be as follows: a. For all meters installed, the fee shall be set by the Board of Appraisers. All installed meters shall be property of the City. b. Meter adapter and radio-read transmitter units fees as established by resolution ofthe City Council. C. Private Fire Service: 1. Available only on flat rate when used for fire protection only; owner ,to install all lines to the City mains at their expense. All connections to be supervised by the City and to conform to City requirements and the Uniform Plumbing Code. The flat rate fees shall be as established by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 02-967, 7-23- 2002) 2. All private fire service lines shall be equipped with sealed gate valve or thermal automatic openings. 3. Private fire service lines shall be used for fire control only. Any other use is unlawful. D. Number Of Equivalent Residential Units Per Use: Assessment fees for new water users, other than single-family residential, shall be based on the number of equivalent residential units (ERU's) listed in Table II, unless other acceptable means of determining ERU's are used. Other acceptable means may include the Uniform Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 17 of29 Plumbing Code "fixture unit" method or examination and analysis of historical consumption records of similar facilities within or outside the City of Meridian. TABLE 3. Equivalent Residential Units Classification Apartment Bank Bar BARBERSHOP, PER CHAIR Beauty salon, per operator station Bowling alley, per lane Cafe, per customer seating capacity Car dealer Car wash (to be computed on an individual basis) Church Club, private Condominium Dentist, per practitioner Department store (per 3,000 square feet) Doctor, per practitioner Drugstore Dry cleaners Duplex Fourplex Garage (minimum) Grocery store Hospital, per bed Industry (see major or minor contributing industry) Laundries Commercial (to be computed on an individual basis) Self-service up to and including 10 washing machines Each washing machine in excess of 10 Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 18 of29 Number Of Minimum ERU's ERU's See Multiple Living Unit 2 2 0.5 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.2 1.0 0.1 2.0 2 xxx 2 2 See Multiple Living Unit I 1 1 2 2 See Multiple Living Unit See Multiple Living Unit 2 See Retail Food Store 0.15 xxx 4 0.25 Lodge or private club 2 Major contributing industry (as per separate xxx agreement) Minor contributing industry (as per separate xxx agreement) Mobile home court or park First space 1 Each additional space, long term tenant type 1 Each additional space, short term tenant type 1 Mobile home or trailer house on own premises 1 Motel. hotel. roomin2: house. etc. With cooking facilities First unit 1 Each additional unit 0.5 Without cooking facilities First unit 1 Each additional unit 0.25 Multiple livin2: unit Studio or I bedroom 1 2 bedrooms 1 3 or more bedrooms 1 Office building for each 2,500 square feet of gross floor space or fraction thereof Photo development lab 2 Railroad depot 2 Restaurant, per customer seating capacity 0.1 2.0 Retail food store for each 1,500 square feet of gross ] floor area or fraction thereof Retail store for each 3,000 square feet of gross floor area or fraction thereof Schools per each 50 students in average daily 1 attendance or fraction thereof Service station Full service 4 Gas and restroom service only 2 Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 19 of29 With car wash (to be computed on an individual basis) xxx Single-family residence 1 Swimmim~ pool Private, for each 500 square feet of pool water surface area Public (to be computed on an individual basis) 0.25 xxx Tavern Theater Townhouse 2 2 1 Trailer court or park First unit Each additional space, long term tenant type Each additional space, short term tenant type 1 0.75 0.5 Triplex Variety store, for each 3,000 square feet of gross floor area or fraction thereof See Multiple Living Unit 1 E. Pass Through Charge To User: The United States Environmental Protection Agency has required the State of Idaho to test drinking water and the State of Idaho through the Department of Environmental Quality, has passed the cost of such testing down to local governmental and private water suppliers. The City must pass the cost of such testing to the water users. Therefore, each water user shall be charged a monthly water assessment of twenty five cents ($0.25) until the Department of Environmental Quality amends or retracts this testing charge. (Ord. 743,9-17-1996) 9-1-20: PAYMENT OF USER CHARGES; LATE FEE: All water charges shall be due and payable to the Municipal Billing Deparbnent fifteen (15) days after the date ofthe billing statement. Upon failure to pay the same, within the time allowed, the water user shall pay, in addition to the amount due, a late payment penalty as set by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 03-1044, 9-23-2003) 9-1-21: DELINQUENCIES; CITY PROCEDURE: A. Termination Of Service; Notice: Each month the Municipal Utility Billing Department shall furnish each water user a statement of the amount due for water and Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 20 of29 sewer and other charges for the preceding month or up to the time that the meter has been read; and if any water user does not pay the billing within fifteen (15) days from the date of the statement, the water user's account shall be delinquent. Water users shall be notified by regular mail of this delinquency and if the bill is not paid in full within ten (10) days after service of this notification on the water user, the right to water shall cease and terminate unless the owner requests a pretermination hearing. Should the water user not request a pretermination hearing, or if an adverse decision is rendered against the owner after a pretermination hearing, the City may require the owner to pay the delinquent water bill attributable to the use, plus a turn on charge as a condition of resumption of water service, and in the event the water meter has been removed, a fee must be paid as a condition of resumption of water service. No allowance will be made for nonuse for less than one month. All corrections as to the charge and all abatements shall be made under the direction of the Mayor and City Council and shall be certified by the Finance Director. B. Right To Hearing: 1. The City, in its delinquency notice to all water users and owners, shall inform them in writing of their right to a pretennination hearing, with such hearing to be held with the due process protection described below. If a pretermination hearing is requested by any water user, the City will not discontinue water service to any water user prior to a fair and impartial hearing, after timely and adequate notice and an opportunity to confront witnesses, to personally appear with retained counsel to be judged on facts adduced at the hearing and to otherwise be heard and defend the claim made by the City. The City Council shall have the responsibility of holding pretermination hearings. The City Council shall make a record of all pretermination hearings. The City Council shall render its decision in writing, giving the reasons for its determination. In decisions adverse to the water user, the City Council will inform the water user of the right to appeal the decision pursuant to the Idaho State Administrative Procedures Act 1 (IC 9 67-5201 et seq). 2. Provided, however, the City shall not initially deny or discontinue water service to any water user because of any delinquent water bill on that premises that is attributable to the prior owner. However, any and all unpaid water charges shall be a lien against the property as provided below. The City may initially deny water service to any water user who requests service at a new location when that water user has a delinquency at any previous location or premises. Provided, further, that the City shall not initially deny water service to any water user for whatever reason without informing the water user of the right to a hearing before the City Council on the issue of whether the City can initially deny water services. In the case of an initial denial of water service, the City is not required to provide water service pending a hearing. However, a hearing upon request of a water user initially denied water service shall be held as expeditiously as possible and held in the manner and accordance with the procedures for pretermination hearings delineated above. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 21 of29 C. Lien Imposed: Where allowed by law, all delinquent charges or fees, as provided by this section, not paid after the final determination of the delinquent account, shall be imposed as a lien against and upon the property or premises against which such charge or fee is levied or assessed; and the City Clerk shall, at the time of certifying the City taxes, certify such delinquencies together with all penalties to the tax collector of Ada County, and when so certified, the same shall be a lien upon the property. All monies collected by the clerk under the provisions of this section shall be paid over to the City Treasurer in the same malU1er as is required for the payment of other City monies. D. Security Deposit: Upon application for new service, or upon reconnection for existing service which was terminated for nonpayment, the City may require a water user to pay a deposit in an account to be determined in accordance with policies established by resolution of the City Council. (Ord. 03-1044, 9-23-2003) 9-1-22: TURNING ON WATER AFTER TURN OFF FOR NONPAYMENT: If any person, after the water has been turned off from the premises on account of nonpayment of fees, or for failure to pay other charges assessed to the owner, or for other violation of the rules and regulations pertaining to the water supply, shall turn on or permit to be turned on, or use or permit the water to be used without authority, he shall be subject to the penalties provided for in section 9-1-36 ofthis chapter. (Ord. 476,4-21- 1987) 9-1-23: AUTHORITY TO AMEND REGULATIONS: Nothing herein contained shall prohibit the Mayor and Council from amending, altering, or adding to the provisions of this chapter in relation to the water supply or the rules of same which may be adopted in conformity therewith. Provided, that no alteration in water rates shall apply to any charge upon, or contract made with, an owner under this chapter until after the expiration of the time for which such charge was made or contract entered into. Hereafter when, and/or if, the Mayor and City Council deem it advisable to alter the water or installation rates or charges as in this chapter recorded, such changes shall be made by resolution. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-24: WATER FUND: All fees and charges received and collected under the authority of this chapter shall be deposited and credited to a fund to be designated as the Water Fund within the utility Enterprise Fund. The accounts of said fund shall show all receipts and expenditures for the maintenance, operation, upkeep and repair of the domestic water system and any payments into a sinking fund established for the purpose of paying principal of and interest on the water indebtedness of the City which shall from time to time be outstanding. As provided by law, when budgeted and appropriated, the funds and credits to the account of the Water Fund shall be available for the payment ofthe requirements for the maintenance, operation, repairs and upkeep of the domestic water system of the Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 22 of29 City, and to the extent legally available, for payment into a sinking fund established for the payment of the principal and interest on any water bond indebtedness of the City which shall from time to time be outstanding. (Ord. 03-1044, 9-23-2003) 9-1-25: PRIVATE WATER SYSTEMS: Where the Municipal water system is not available under the provisions of this chapter, a private water system may be installed; provided, that the system complies with all the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff.2-1-1975) A. Permit Required; Fee: Before commencement of construction of a private water system, the owner shall first obtain written permit from the City. The application for said permit shall be made on a form furnished by the City, which the applicant shall supplement by plans, specifications and other information as may be deemed necessary by the City. Review and inspection fees shall be established by resolution of the City CounciL (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975; amd. 1999 Code) B. Inspection Of System: A permit for a private water system shall not permit the use of the system until the installation is completed to the satisfaction of the City. The City shall be allowed to inspect the work at any stage of construction and, the applicant for the permit shall notify the City when the work is ready for various inspections, and before any underground works are covered. The applicant shall be responsible for payment of all applicable inspection fees prior to issuance of a building permit. C. Compliance With State Regulations: The type, capacities, location and layout of a private water system shall comply with all of the rules and regulations and recommendations of the State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) D. Mandatory Connection With City Water When Available: The owner or occupant of any house, building or property used for residential, commercial, industrial, govenunental or recreational use, or other purpose, situated within the City which is abutting on or having a permanent right of access to any street, alley or right of way in which there is located a City water line is hereby required to cease using any other water system and at his expense to connect such building directly with the City water in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter, within sixty (60) days after the date of official notice from the City to do so; provided, however, that the City water is within three hundred feet (300') of any property line where said building to be served is located. At such time as the Municipal water system becomes available to the property served by the private water system, and the owner or tenant connects his property to Municipal service as required, it is mandatory that the private water supply is not connected or cross-connected in any way to the water lines served by the Municipal water system. (Ord. 476,4-21-1987) Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 23 of 29 E. Conduct Of Private System; Health And Safety: The owners shall operate and maintain the private water facility in a manner conducive to public health and safety at all times, and at no expense to the City. F. Provisions Additional To State Regulations: No statement contained in this Section shall be construed to interfere with any additional requirements that may be imposed by the State ofIdaho Department of Environmental Quality or Department of Health and Welfare. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) 9-1-26: WATERLINE DEVELOPMENT: The primary cost and responsibility for water line development shall be that of the owner, subdivider or developer. It shall be the owner, subdivider or the developer's responsibility to purchase and lay water lines from the present water supply to the proposed project and to the boundary of the project farthest from the original water supply line, including frontage roads. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-27: WATER PLANS ADOPTED: The City shall, from time to time and as necessary, update the water system master plan in order to provide adequate water supply to the City of Meridian. 9-1-28: PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION SYSTEM Sccalsosuhscclion 12-5-2N ofthis Code.30: A. System Required; Waiver: 1. In addition to the requirements of this Chapter pertaining to the domestic water system and its use, every residentially zoned lot, parcel or piece of land upon which a residential unit will be constructed, after the effective date hereof, shall construct, install, or connect to a pressurized irrigation system. In the case of residential subdivision developments, a pressurized irrigation system shall be constructed and installed at the same time as the domestic water lines, but not in the same trenches. There shall be no cross-connections between the domestic water lines and the irrigation water lines that do not comply with Chapter 3 ofthis Title. 2. Provided, however, the requirements of this Section may be waived upon proof that any particular lot, parcel or piece ofland does not have water rights in an existing irrigation district. B. Standards: The City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to establish standards for pressurized irrigation systems and all pressurized irrigation systems shall comply with those standards. However, those pressurized irrigation systems under the ownership and operation and maintenance responsibility of an irrigation district shall comply with the standards of that irrigation district. (Ord. 516, 10-3-1989) Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 24 of29 C. Joint-Use Connection Of Irrigation And City Systems: 1. No subdivision, or building, lot, or parcel of land located within that subdivision, which subdivision, building, lot, or parcel ofland, has a common landscape sprinkler irrigation system being supplied landscape irrigation water from a source other than the City's domestic water system, shall be allowed to also connect its landscape sprinkler irrigation system to the City's domestic water system as a secondary source for "shoulder season" use. Provided however, all buildings, lots, or parcels ofland, within the subdivision connected to the common landscape sprinkler irrigation system may be allowed one joint-use point of connection to the City's domestic water system which connection shall have an approved backflow prevention device. This joint-use connection shall only be to provide irrigation water during the time when the common landscape irrigation system has no supply of water. However, a joint-use connection shall not be allowed ifthe subdivision, building, lot or parcel is supplied irrigation water from a ground water well. The off-on control valve of this joint use connection shall be under the control of the Water Superintendent. (Ord. 570, 3w3-1992; amd. 1999 Code) 2. Fees: For water assessments on irrigable common areas included in a subdivision, the applicant must pay the portion of the water assessment fee designated for City water supply and storage. 9-1-29: CITY NOT LIABLE FOR SHORTAGE: The City shall not be held liable for damage to any person or property by reason of stoppage or other interruption of the water supply, caused by scarcity of water, lack of pressure, accident to works or mains, alterations, additions, or repairs or from other unavoidable causes. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) 9-1-30: LAWN SPRINKLING AND WATER USE RESTRICTIONS: A. Lawn And Garden Sprinkling: 1. Sprinkling To Cease During Fire: The City may curtail non-domestic use of water during a state of emergency, as determined by the Public Works Director. No fountain attachment shall be of greater than three-fourths inch (3/4") in diameter unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, and there shall be a stopcock to each fountain attachment and the same shall be under the control ofthe Superintendent of Waterworks. Any person violating any of the provisions of this Section shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to penalty as provided in Section 9-1-36 of this Chapter. Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 25 of29 2. Sprinkling Hose Size: In any time of scarcity of water, whenever it shall, in the judgment of the Mayor and Council be necessary and they shall so direct, the Mayor shall, by proclamation, limit the use of water for other than domestic purposes; and in hislher discretion provide that lawn sprinklers and hydrants shall be used only on alternate days in certain designated localities and any person violating the provisions of this Section or of any proclamation made by the Mayor ofthe City shall, upon conviction thereof, be subject to penalty as provided in Section 9-1-36 of this Chapter. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) B. Water Use Restricted: Watering troughs for animals shall not be allowed a constant flow of water but shall be allowed to use such quantity as shall supply the actual needs of the stock having access thereto, nor shall continuous streams of water be permitted to flow from hydrants, faucets, or stops over wash basins, water closets, or urinals. (1955 Code ~ 5-115) 9-1-31: POST HOLE DIGGING: No utility poles, or other posts shall be located within four feet (4) of any water service pipe, nor within six feet (6') of any main pipe. (1955 Code ~ 5-118; amd. 1999 Code) 9-1-32: FIRE HYDRANTS: A. Authority To Operate; Obstructing Access: It shall be unlawful for any person, except one duly authorized by the City, to open, close, operate, turn on, turn off, interfere with, attach any pipe or hose to or connect anything with any fire hydrant or auxiliary valve belonging to the City. Further, it shall be unlawful for any person to obstruct the access to any fire hydrant by placing any fence, stone, brick, lumber, dirt, or other material within five feet of the fire hydrant as measured horizontally in any direction. It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully or carelessly injure any fire hydrant. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) B. Damaging Hydrants: Any person who shall willfully or carelessly run any vehicle against a fire hydrant, or draw or attempt to draw water therefrom shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a fine and costs, and be liable for aU damages done to said hydrant. (1955 Code ~ 5-138; amd. 1999 Code) 9-1-33: PROTECTION OF PIPES AND METERS: All water users shall keep their pipes, connections and other apparatus in good repair and protected from frost at their own expense. All water users shall provide and maintain a four (4) feet by four (4) clear access, centered on the water meter lid, to the water meter serving their lot. However no person, except under the direction of the Superintendent of Waterworks, shall be allowed to dig into the street or sidewalk for the purpose of laying, removing or repairing any service pipe. (1955 Code ~ 5-108) Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 26 of29 9-1-34: WASTE OF WATER OR INJURY TO WATER SYSTEM: A. Waste Prohibited: It shall be unlawful for any water user to waste water or allow it to be wasted by imperfect water stops, valves or leaky pipes that are not under the jurisdiction of the City, or to permit the malicious or willful consumption of water, having no beneficial use. The City, based on meter readings, will make a determination of where water has been wasted and shall notify the user of that determination. It shall then be the user's responsibility to make the necessary repairs, or to institute actions that will correct the situation within ten (10) days ofthe City's notification to the user. All costs incurred, including the cost of wasted water and any repairs shall be the responsibility of the user and if it is necessary that the City correct the situation or make repairs, the cost and charges therefore may be assessed and added to the owner's water bill. B. Damage Or Injury To System: No person shall maliciously, willfully, or negligently break, damage, destroy, uncover, deface, or tamper with any structure, pipe line, fire hydrant, fitting connection appurtenance or equipment which is a part of the Municipal water system. (Ord. 273, 1-6-1975, eff. 2-1-1975) 9-1-35: USERS LIABLE FOR VIOLATION: If any owner shall permit any person from any other premises, or any unauthorized user to use or obtain water from his premises or water fixtures, whether inside or outside of his buildings, the water supply of such owner may be cut off; and such unauthorized person shall, for taking said water, be liable to a fine, plus costs. Any user or owner suspected of having violated the provisions of this Chapter, other than nonpayment of user fees, assessments, or charges for repairs, shall be notified of the violation and be notified that if the violation is not corrected within ten (10) days, the Water Superintendent shall shut off his water; provided however, in the event of an emergency, the Water Superintendent may shut off the water without notification. (Ord. 476, 4-21- 1987) 9-1-36: PENALTIES: A. Notice Of Violation; Responsibility For Remedy: Any person found to be violating any provisions of this Chapter, other than for nonpayment of a water bill, shall be served by the City with a written notice stating the nature ofthe violation and providing ten (10) days for the satisfactory correction thereof. The offender shall, within the period of time stated in such notice, permanently cease all violations and if necessary make all corrections and repairs to the system or pay for same if the City has to make the correction or repair. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) B. Penalty Imposed; Discontinue Service: Any person who shall continue any violation beyond the time limit provided for in this Section, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 27 of29 and, on conviction thereof, shall be subject to penalty as provided in Section 1-4-1 of this Code, and shall have his water service terminated. Each day in which such violation shall continue shall be deemed a separate offense. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987; amd. 1999 Code) C. Liability To City For Loss Or Damage: Any person violating any of the provisions of this Chapter shall become liable to the City for any expense, loss, or damage occasioned the City by reason of such violation and, for other than nonpayment of water bill violations, may have their water supply terminated after the above ten (10) day notice period has expired. D. Cumulative Penalties: These penalties shall not be construed to be exclusive but shall be cumulative of, and in addition to, any other penalties provided for in this City Code or the Criminal Code ofthe State ofIdaho. As an example, a person stealing water could be criminally charged with theft or a person injuring the water system could be criminally charged with malicious injury to property. For all criminal violations relating or pertaining to the water system, the notice provisions provided for in this Chapter shall not apply. (Ord. 476, 4-21-1987) SECTION 3: All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 4: VALIDITY: The Meridian City Council hereby declares that any section, paragraph, sentence or word of this Ordinance as adopted and amended herein be declared for any reason to be invalid it is the intent of the Meridian City Council that it would have passed all other portions of this Ordinance independent of the elimination herefrom of any portion as may be declared invalid. SECTION 5: SAVINGS CLAUSE: This Ordinance does not affect an action or proceeding commenced or right accrued before this Ordinance takes effect. SECTION 6: DATE OF EFFECT: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this .?~ dayof Oth?~,2004. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 5.tt.- day of tPvh- ~ , 2004. ATTEST: Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 28 of 29 dldt--~&p City Clerk 9- \\\\\111111 1111/111/ ,\\\~~ of MEA!/)/I,/, " ~, <<.?A .... " ...~" ~1.A ~ 'i..... 2' 0- ot\?oFt<t)'; . II' ~ ~ ~c; ~ ~ :: ~ ~ - - - - = ; - - - - - ~: - ~!:Irn ~ ::- An Ordinance of the City of Meridian ~X '~'';' G:~elr ,Jll.,~ity Clerk First Reading: 1&-~..-t74- ~ '6-,<! T1S' R>~,.f Adopted after first reading by suspension &rtt.l]~~ms a~.l)\V-ed pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: YES >C NO '/111';;:;,1\\\\'" Second Reading: Third Reading: - STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada. ) On this J"'fh day of Oc-J.o her , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared TAMMY de WEERD and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the da~l~nd year first above written. ~.\I' ..'" ..'.\,C'E L. SA~4" ~.... b..~ ........"....;'71';.".... ,: ,\V.. 0" ...1-. ~ ~ ~ ~Tr ~ ~. : ~OT Ai ' ~ ~ * : ~ ... II .......... '~t (SEAL) i \. ~ C,,~., ~ ...~ -l""OBL\ . : ~ <1. <. .0:: ~ or" ~~ ..0. 0 .... .............( "-... ~ _....~' II V .,......fIt +. ~.( ( 1 \J ~ .... +4'... . ,~~~ ..... , .. z:\ Work\M\Meridian\MeridianI5360M\Ordinances City Hall\2004 Ord\ Water use and service regulations revision October 2004.doc ,~ ( OT RY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO RE DING AT: MenWJd.'1. ;.~ COMMISSION EXPIRES: tJ!jJ;;.oj07 Water Use and Service Revision Ordinance Page 29 of29 NOTICE AND PUBLISHED SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO I.c. ~ SO-901(A) CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. 04- (I tJ 6 PROVIDING FOR REPEAL AND RE-ENACTMENT OF WATER USE AND SERVICE REGULATIONS. This ordinance of the City of Meridian repeals Chapter I of Title 9 of the Meridian City Code concerning Water Use and Service regulations, and re-enacts a new Chapter I, Title 9. The new chapter contains purpose, definitions, jurisdiction, mandatory use, how application for service is made and processed, determines where City liability for water service lines begins and ends, regulates water service connections and water lines, workmanship, backfilling and surface repair, right of entry for inspection, water main extensions, assessments and fees, cooperative or reimbursement agreements, how water charges are calculated, water user and equivalent connection appraisals, when service can be extended outside of the City limits, when charges are due and when late charges may be assessed, effects of delinquent accounts, turn off of water service for nonpayment, establishment of a water fund within the enterprise fund, regulates private water systems, regulates pressurized irrigation systems, limits City liability for shortages, regulates lawn sprinkling and water use restrictions as well as post locations, provides for fire hydrants, protects water meters and pipes, prohibits the waste of water, makes users liable for violation of the ordinance and provides penalties for violations. A full text of this ordinance is available for inspection at City Hall, Ci~ of Meridian, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. This ordinance shall R~H'l~:r\-nYI effective on the 5'- day of CJch ~ \\\\ 1111 - 2004. ",\\, OF MEIt,^'III/ ...,....:'\ "'\ V/ //// A. .:"..::... 0' cp'flPoFLq)", :..;11,- \ ~ ~.. ~ ~o ~ ~'~~"'~I ~ - City of Meridian ~ r. 7 : Mayor and City Council % '7. vo(; ,Qi 0 f By: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk -;.-::;.. ()~ 'Sr lS1 . ~~.;:$ -> a \V " 'i>", OUNT'<. \\\\" First Reading: I ~ - S - tl 4--"1{! ::; i\l\\'."\ Adopted after first reading by suspension of the Rule as allowed pursuant to Idaho Code 50-902: YES fG NO Second Reading: Third Reading: Z:\Work\M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\Ordinances City Hall\2004 Ord\Water use and service Sum Ord October 2004.doc Water Use and Service Regulation Revision Summary Page 1 of 1 ( BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL C/C October 5, 2004 IN THE MATTER OF THE ) APPLICATION FORA ONE-TIME ) LOT DIVISION TO SEPARATE AN ) UN-PLATTED PARCEL INTO TWO ) PARCELS IN AN I-L ZONE ) LOCA TED AT 850 WEST ) FRANKLIN ROAD IN THE SW ~ T. ) 3N., R. tW., SECTION 12 ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. MI-04-009 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION This matter coming before the City Council for Miscellaneous Application approval pursuant to Meridian City Code S 12-3- 1. B for an Administrative Lot Spilt of Unplatted Ground for Joe Pachner, and the Council finding that the Administrative Review is complete from Sonya Allen, Assistant City Planner, for the Planning and Zoning Department, dated: Hearing Date: October 5, 2004 to the Mayor and Council, the council takes the following action: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The subject application by Joe Pachner, Engineer, is approved subject to those conditions of Staff comments as set forth in the memorandum to the Mayor and City Council, from Sonya Allen, Assistant City Planner, for the Plmming and Zoning Department, dated: Hearing Date: October 5, 2004 listing four (4) Conditions of Approval, a true and correct of which is ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LOT SPLIT OF UNPLAITED GROUND FOR JOE PACHNER (MI-04-009) Page 1 of3 attached hereto marked Exhibit "A", and consisting of three (3) pages, and by this reference incorporated herein. 2. The Record of Survey (ROS) upon which there is contained the certificate and signature of the City Engineer verifying that the drawing meets the City's requirements shall be signed only at such time as: 1. The ROS dimensions are approved by the City Engineer and; 2. The City Engineer has verified that all off-site improvements are completed and/or the appropriate letter of credit or cash has been issued guaranteeing the completion of off-site and required on-site improvements. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION AND RIGHT TO REGULATORY T AKlNGS ANALYSIS The Applicant is hereby notified that pursuant to Idaho Code 67-8003, the Owner may request a regulatory taking analysis. Such request must be in writing, and must be filed with the City Clerk not more than twenty-eight (28) days after the final decision concerning the matter at issue. A request for a regulatory takings analysis will toll the time period within which a Petition for Judicial Review may be filed. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code 9 67-6521. An affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by this decision may, within twenty-eight (28) days after the date ofthis decision and order, seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATNE LOT SPLIT OF UNPLATTED GROUND FOR JOE PACHNER (MI-04-009) Page 2 of3 By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 5 *" day of -October , 2004. By: Attest: \\\\dlllII 1IJillj \\\ f Me III \,\\' '-l. 0 L::./Yt.o. 1;1;; -.\ .:<,. ~ 'i ~ 0' ~POR 11- ..;.. $ cP '1~ -=;. ~ ~ 6;:;. 2 ~ S .... .... .... By: jou..a...... ~"'- t Q f\-} City Clerk's Office Dated: 10- d''t.:fr:l- ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LOT SPLIT OF UNPLATTED GROUND FOR JOE PACHNER (MI-04-009) Page 3 of3 , , MAYOR Tammy de Weerd ~ P r CITY OF - '~~~, '-/VI erldia;i:~-~4f ~I IDAHO I' / ~ ! 1903 CITY HALL (208) 888-4433 - Fax 887-4813 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 - Fax 898-9551 LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 466-9272 - FAX 466-4405 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Keith Bird William L.M. Nmy Shaun Wardle Charles M. Rountree MEMORANDUM: Hearing Date: October 5, 2004 To: Mayor and City Council Sonya Allen, Assistant City Planner JIl From: Subject: Miscellaneous Application for Joe Pachner, Toothman-Orton Engineering Co. (owner Helen Rowley) Request for a Reduction in Platting Requirements to Divide a 3.44 Acre Parcel into Two Parcels (MI-04-002). Staff has reviewed the above referenced submittal and offers the following comments. APPLICATION SUMMARY & LOCATION The applicant, Joe Pachner, Toothman-Orton Engineering Co., has submitted a Miscellaneous Application (MI) requesting a reduction in platting requirements to divide a 3.44 acre parcel into two parcels. The subject parcel is split zoned I-L (Light Industrial) and C-G (General Retail and Service Commercial) and is not part of a recorded subdivision. The C-G portion of the parcel is adjacent to W. Franklin Road. The subject property is located at 850 W. Franklin Road, on the north side of Franklin, midway between Meridian and Linder Road. The owner of the property is Helen Rowley and she has provided notarized consent for the division of her property. A site plan has been submitted showing how the 3.44 acre parcel will be divided. The back portion of the parcel is located in an I-L (Light Industrial) zone, which has no minimum lot area or street frontage requirements. Future development must comply with MCC 11-9-1 regarding building setbacks, lot coverage, and height restrictions. Exhibit "A" Mayor & City Council Hearing Date: October 5,2004 Page 2 of3 In June, 2004, the Planning & Zoning Department established a new policy and procedure regarding re-subdivisions. This decision was based on MCC 12-3-1.B. which states the following: Re-Subdivision: Notwithstanding the definition of "subdivisionl1 contained in Section 11-2-2 of this Code, where an applicant desires to subdivide an existing lot which is located in an existing subdivision which has been previously recorded and the required improvements made thereon, he may do so without going through the entire platting procedure required by this Title. He shall, however, submit an application for re- subdivision showing the existing lot and how the lot is proposed to be re-subdivided. The City shall then determine what requirements of this Title shall be complied with by the applicant. The City may require full compliance if deemed necessary. The provisions of this subsection pertaining to the reduction in platting requirements of certain parcels may apply to previously unplatted and unsubdivided ground upon application to the City Council. (Ord. 456, 9-3-1985) The Planning Director, City Engineer, and City Attorney determined that this ordinance allows property owners to request a re-subdivision of property if the proposed division meets the following criteria: 1. If the property is within a recorded subdivision, a Lot Line Adjustment application must be submitted and may be approved at staff level. 2. If the property is unplatted, a Miscellaneous application must be submitted and heard by the City Council. If the Miscellaneous application is approved by City Council, a Lot Line Adjustment application must be submitted. 3. For either platted or unplatted land, the applicant must provide drawings that show a) the existing parcel and the proposed split, b) any and all existing and proposed improvements within or adjoining the property, c) proposed sewer connection and profiles, and d) any other information deemed as appropriate or necessary by the City Engineer and/or Planning Director. 4, Both parcels that result from the split must meet the minimum yard requirements of the applicable zone per MCC 11-9-1. 5. Applications for re-subdivisions of property will only be considered for property zoned as commercial and/or industrial. Residentially zoned land is not eligible. Properties would be limited to a one-time split under these provisions. 6. Platting requirements for condominium plats may also be considered under these provisions where the condominium plat only affects ownership and does not result in additional development of the property. STAFF ANALYSIS MI-04-009 Exhibit "A" Pachner MI.doc Mayor & City Council Hearing Date: October 5, 2004 Page 3 of3 The applicant meets the above stated requirements for re-subdivision. Sewer and water services will need to be extended from W. Franklin Road to the rear parcel prior to development of that parcel. A Lot Line Adjustment application will be required to be submitted for this property after approval of this application. This is the second request that staffhas brought before the City Council regarding a "lot split" for unplatted property. The previous applicant committed to include both properties in a subdivision application prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. This applicant has not made that commitment. Should Council wish to add that as a condition of approval, the following language should be added as Condition #5: "The applicant shall make the subject split parcel a lot in afuture subdivision. Such subdivision application shall be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department and acceptedfor processing prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, " Staff was not able to discuss this condition of approval with the applicant prior to filing the staff report with the Clerk's Office. CONDITIONS OF APPRO V AL 1. Applicant must comply with all subdivision improvements as required by MCC 12-5-2. 2. Applicant shall comply with all improvements as required by Ada County Highway District. 3. Applicant shall submit a recorded copy of the Record of Survey signed by the City Engineer prior to Certificate of Zoning Compliance issuance. 4. A cross-access agreement between the two proposed parcels is required to be submitted with the Lot Line Adjustment application since the back parcel does not have street frontage. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this application with the above noted conditions, MI-04-009 Exhibit "An Pachner MI.doc ** TX CONFIRMATION REPORT ** AS OF OCT 101 '104 18:31 PAGE. 101 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDI:t STATUS 89 10/81 17:45 3818168 EC--S 01'49" 883 801 OK 18 10/01 17:48 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S 81'83" 803 801 OK 11 10/01 17:50 12884664485 EC--S 01'85" 003 881 OK 12 10/01 17:52 8841159 EC--S 01'04" 8103 001 OK 13 10/81 17:53 2088840744 EC--S 01'86" 803 881 OK 15 18/01 17:55 POLICE DEPT EC--S 01'04" 803 001 OK 16 18/81 17:57 8985581 EC--S 01'03" 083 081 OK 17 10/81 17:58 LIBRARY EC--S 81' 24" 083 861 OK 18 18/01 18:80 92883776449 EC--S 81'03" 883 801 OK 19 18/81 18:01 3886924 EC--S 61'03" 8103 801 OK 26 18/01 18:83 2888886854 EC--S 81'83" 803 861 OK 21 10/81 18:85 288 895 8398 EC--S 81 '03" 0103 881 OK 22 18/81 18:86 128388840 G3--S 81'22" 883 001 OK 23 18/81 18:88 ADA CTY DEVELMT EC--5 81'03" 8103 861 OK 24 10/01 18:10 88851052 EC--S 81'83" 883 801 OK 25 18/01 18:12 CHERRY LANE G3--S 02'04" 083 801 OK 26 18/81 18:15 IDAHO ATHLETIC C EC--S 81'84" 883 881 OK 27 18/01 18:16 ID PRESS TRIBUNE EC--S 01'84" 8103 2161 OK 28 10/01 18:18 2888886701 EC--S 01'04" 083 881 OK 29 16/01 18:31 ACHD DEV ----5 80'80" 880 001 BUSY THIS DOCUMENT IS STIll IN MEMORY -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ~\-Ca!( ~ DC..\- ..\.(..("fub \ \ Co 1I0-hc-c - \ ~\OJ\..~ t '. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Rol1~call Attendance: Shaun Wardle Vacant Charlie Rountree Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LOS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: " c.......::.......... ....c c....r.&. ..........1 ^'__...... _I___J!_ ( ** TX CONI-."rlATIDN REPORT ** 21 22 24 25 26 27 28 29 313 31 32 DATE TIME TO/FROM 113/131 17:23 381131613 113/131 17:24 PUBLIC WORKS 113/131 17:27 20646644135 113/131 17:28 8841159 113/131 17:29 213888413744 113/131 17:29 POLICE DEPT 113/131 17:313 89855131 113/131 17:31 LIBRARY 113/131 17:32 92083776449 113/131 17:33 3886924 113/131 17:34 2088886854 ( AS OF OCT 131 '134 17:35 PAGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN MODE EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S MIN/SEC PGS 1313'38" 13131 1313'26" 13131 1313'25" 1301 130'26" 13131 1313'27" 1301 1313'26" 1301 00'26" 1301 1313'31" 1301 210'25" 0131 1313' 26" 13131 1313'26" 13131 CMDU 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 255 STFlTUS OK OK OK 0\( OK OK 0\( OK OK OK OK --------------------------------------------------------------~----------------------------- ~lta.s(... \.....oS.\- t-Qr ru.lolrGNOt'\cc... - InV...HI--Il: \ MAYOR Tammy de We~rd Crty COUNCIl, MEMBE1~$ William L. M. Nary Keith Bird Charl~~ M. Rounlree Shaun W..rdle ern D~l'M(fMENTS Fire $40 E. Prankl i n Roe d 888-12341 fax llYS-U.W(l PMkS & Rr.crca ti on 11 U. 60wer Street 888-3579/ fax 898-550 I Planning &. %:oTling 660 [1. Water lower lane Suite 202 884-55331 fax 888-GS54 Police 1401 E. Walerlower Lane 8118-067$/ fax 8<16-7366 Public Works 660 E. Wat~!lower t.~n,) Sui", 200 S96-5S0U/fax 1198-9551 - BLlilding 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite lS0 8$7.2211 Ita'<. 887-1297 - Sewer (WWTP) 3401 N. Ten Mile R,Qad 888-2191 /i.~ 884-0744 - Water 2235 N. w. 8th Str~"L 888-5242/lax 884-1159 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, October 5,2004 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issues: - DIscussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale - Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Vafley - Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05 - Discussion and Review of Clothing Policy The public is welcome to attend the meeting, DATED this 1st of October. 2004. CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAI-IO AVENUE MEHlDJAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) S8S-4433 cn.,. r.~~~K-F^~ 1388."'2113 HUM,\M R;;SOtlRCe5-P"'K SM.S723 flN.\/<C>: ~ miLl7\" lllt~ING-M'oX 8S7'4-S13 hl,\\'OR'S llFFlr.E-M'oX 884.8119 ~p /CITYOF . L/Vlerldian'~}; ~'\I IDAHO ~ ;.. J- ,.~(,. / "VII . .I(:) ih( -nU~.\."l'i.f,E V.'\~\'" MAYOR Tammy de Weerd CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS William L. M. Nary Keith Bird Charles M, Rountree Shaun Wardle CITY DEPARTMENTS Fire 540 E. Franklin Road 888.1234/ fax 895-0390 Parks & Recreation 11 E. Bower Street 888-3579/ fax 898-5501 Planning & Zoning 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 202 884-5533/ fax 888-6854 Police 1401 E. Watertower Lane 888-6678/ fax 846.7366 Public Works 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 200 898-5500/ fax 898-9551 - Building 660 E. Watertower Lane Suite 150 887-2211/fax 887-1297 - Sewer (WWTP) 3401 N. Ten Mile Road 888-2191/ fax 884-0744 - Water 2235 N. W. 8th Street 888-5242/ fax 884-1159 J ~j-Jk:=tlS (... I/o~t +-Or ~Gl6ll c. NQi--\c c:, - \ V\OUf\I~-s ~ ~ C NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCil MEETING MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold a Pre-Council Meeting at City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 6:00 P.M. The Meridian City Council will be discussing agenda items which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting as well as the following issues: - Discussion of Black Cat Sewer Trunk by David Turnbull and Frank Varriale - Request for Sewer Service by Calvary Chapel Treasure Valley - Transportation Task Force Recommendations for TIP FY05 - Discussion and Review of Clothing Policy The public is welcome to attend the meeting, DATED this 1st of October, 2004. CITY HALL 33 EAST IDAHO AVENUE MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 CITY CLERK-FAX 888.4218 HU~IAN RESQURCES-fi\X 884-8723 FIN,\NCE & UTILITY BILLING-FAX 887-4813 hIAYOR'S OFFICE-FAX 884-8119 r ( ** TX CONF'. ..~TION REPORT li<* CITY OF MERIDIRN DATE TIME TO/FROM 2S 10/06 00:36 3810160 26 10/06 00:38 PUBLIC WORKS 27 10/06 00:40 12084664405 28 10/06 210:42 8841159 29 10/216 00:44 2088840744 30 10/06 00:46 POLICE DEPT 31 10/06 00:47 89855211 32 10/86 2121; 49 LIBRARY MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDl:l STATUS EC--S 02' 12" 004 040 OK EC--S 01'16" 0e4 e40 OK EC--S 01'17" 004 040 OK EC--S 01'17"13134 040 OK EC--S 01'20" 1304 e4Q OK EC--S 01'16" 0134 040 OK EC--S 01' 15" 13134 1340 OK EC--S 131'413" 0134 e4B OK --------------------------------------------------------------~----------------------------- CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR. MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5. 2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-calf Attendance: Sl1aun Wardle Vacant Charlie Rountree =x:: Keith Bird ---1s.-. Mayor Tammy de Ween:! 2. Pledge of Allegiance: ~""/~i"Yl""" :i= 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LOS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: ~IJ-<-.-' 5. Consent Agenda: A, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ. 04- 018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R. 8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: ~ B, Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: pp 04- 025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R.8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: ~ C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 008 Request for a Rezone of .23 acre from R-8 to proposed Q-T zone for Larry Kno!?o by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: W"........... D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: CUP 04-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in an existing building in the proposed O-T zone for Larry Knoop by Larry Knopp -713 North Meridian Road: 4--~~ E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04.020 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an Meridi(lII City Co~n~il ^8l'lllla - O,wber S. 2UQ4 Page I 00 All m.ton.b ptC'!-OII100 ~t pub!i.: mccling..holl b..~mc propcny ohlle Cif)' of Moridilll\. Anyone dosirinll =mmmlo.1:ion tor diSibiUti<5 rcl3ted to documellts .nd/or lIeorinB pI",,>. eoolact tll<>Cl(y ClQl\;'$ Office at 8g5443) ot 1....1 48 hoUl'S prior to the public ",o<tioe. ** TX C~ ( ocr 06 .0.....11:13 PAGE. 131 AT ION REPORT ** AS OF CITY OF MERIDlAN 01 02 03 04 05 136 07 08 139 113 11 DATE TI ME TO/FROM 10/06 00:51 92083776449 113/06 1313:53 3886924 10/06 00:55 208B88SB54 10/136 00:57 208 895 0390 113/06 00:59 208 387 6393 10/136 131:1313 ADA CTY DEVELMT 10/06 01:132 9885052 113/06 01:04 CHERRY LRNE 10/06 01'137 IDAHO ATHLETIC C 113/06 01:139 ID PRESS TRIBUNE 113/0601'11 208B8B6701 MODE EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S EC--S G3--S EC--S EC--S EC--S MIN/SEC PGS 01'15" 004 01' 16" 13134 01'16" BB4 01'16" 004 01'16" 004 e1' 17" 1304 131'16" 004 132'35" 004 01'16" 1304 01'17" 004 01'16" IilB4 CMDli 040 e40 040 040 040 0413 040 0413 13413 840 040 STATUS OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5, 2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roil-caB Attendance: X . Shaun Wardle Vacant ::L Charlie Rountree :=x= Keith Bird --'s.- Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: ~b.c..IL/""'''",, 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LDS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: "Pf"'O......... 5. Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of I..aw for Approval: AZ.. 04- 018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R. 8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road; ~ B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: PP 04- 025 Request for Preliminary Pfat approval for 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R-B zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: ~ C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04. 008 Request for a Rezone of .23 acre from R-8 to proposed D-T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: '"?P"'- D. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: CUP 04-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use [n an existing building in the proposed O-T zone for LarN Knopp by Lany Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: iV~vo....- E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04.020 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an Metidim,CltyCountll AS""d.-OtlllberS, 2004 PageloD All 01.",,,.10 vr~cnlC<l M public m<etinll1' .holl ...,ome propen;' .floc Ciry of Meridi".. A.llyO"" dciring ""oumrnodo.oon to, <1;submtics rdued III docume.nts .ndlol' ~ring pl"",e eom"ct thc c;ty Cleck'. Office 01 88S4433 011=148 hows prior to the pUblic mcellns. . 0 ~ -ll'b- l, . \JC)1\C'C --\ 't\. CLY\..~ t \, ~\(af (. r O(~ .......1(' r Ll L , ( ,. CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, October 5,2004 at 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll-call Attendance: Shaun Wardle Vacant Charlie Rountree Keith Bird Mayor Tammy de Weerd 2. Pledge of Allegiance: 3. Community Invocation by Bishop Jeff Winter, with LOS Church: 4. Adoption of the Agenda: 5. Consent Agenda: A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: AZ 04- 018 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 19.4 acres from RUT to R- 8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: PP 04- 025 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 77 single-family residential building lots and 4 common lots on 19.4 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Chatsworth Subdivision by Dyver Development, LLC - west of South Locust Grove Road and south of East Victory Road: C. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 008 Request for a Rezone of .23 acre from R-8 to proposed O-T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: O. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of law for Approval: CUP 04-019 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a retail and professional office use in an existing building in the proposed O-T zone for Larry Knopp by Larry Knopp - 713 North Meridian Road: E. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 04-020 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a pharmacy in an Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 1 of3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. L-Q zone for Medicap Pharmacy by Larry Knopp - east of North Ten Mile Road on north side of West Cherry Lane: F. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: VAC 04-005 Request for a Vacation of side yard utility and irrigation easements on Lots 43-45, and Lots 88-91, Block 23, Ashford Greens Subdivision NO.2 by Brighton Corporation - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Ustick Road: G. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: RZ 04- 010 Request for a Rezone of .68 acre from R4 to an Q-T zone for Mittleider Rezone by Leon Smith - 125 West Cherry Lane and 1645 West 18t Street: H. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: M104- 007 Miscellaneous request for an administrative lot split of unplatted ground for Ronald Van Auker by Ronald Van Auker - northeast corner of Franklin Road and Gaudians Avenue: I. Approve Beer and Wine License Renewal for Quik-Wok - 3055 East Fairview Avenue: J. Well #25 Control System: K. Streetlight Agreement for Woodside Creek: L. Land Lease Agreement with Ken Hamilton Presentations: M. Approve Bills: 6. Department Reports 7. (Items Moved from Consent Agenda) 8. Public Hearing: AZ 04-022 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 4.91 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Redfeather Village Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of North Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: 9. Public Hearing: PP 04-029 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 20 single family residential building lots on 4.91 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Reclfeather Village Subdivision by Packard Estates Development, LLC - east of north Eagle Road and north of East Fairview Avenue: 10. Public Hearing: CUP 04..029 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a daycare facility for 30 to 40 children in an R-8 zone for Condra Steeves Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5,2004 Page 2 of 3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property ofthe City of Meridian. Anyone desiring acconunodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearing please contact fue City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Davcare Center by Condra and Donald Steeves - 1258 East Cougar Creek Drive: 11. Public Hearing: AZ 04-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 10 acres from RUT to R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: 12. Public Hearing: PP 04-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval for 33 single family residential building lots and 3 common lots on 10 acres in a proposed R-8 zone for Arcadia Subdivision by C7 Development - 3665 Jericho Road: 13. Public Hearing: VAR 04-006 Request for a Variance from MCC 11-10-6 to allow a childcare/preschool for five or fewer children to be operated in a required garage area of a single-family home in an R-4 zone for Earl and Donna Bohrn by Earl and Donna Bohrn -1451 North Santa Rosa Place: 14. Public Hearing: M104-010 Request to a modify the hours of operation approved previously under CUP 01-016 from 8 am to 10 pm Monday thru Saturday and 9 am to 9 pm Sunday to 6 am to 10 pm seven days a week for Cherry Crossing Subdivision by Robnett Construction, Inc. - northwest corner of West Cherry Lane and North Under Road: 15. Public Hearing: MI 04-009 Request to allow a one-time lot division to separate an un-platted parcel into two parcels in an I-L zone for Joe Pachner by Joe Pachner - 850 West Franklin Road: 16. Public Hearing: MI 04-008 Request to modify the condition of the approved Preliminary Plat regarding the 5-foot wide asphalt pathway within Nampa Meridian Irrigation District's easement for Castlebrook Subdivision No.3 by Liberty Development, Inc. - east of North Black Cat Road and south of West Cherry Lane: 17. Water, Sewer, & Trash Delinquencies: 18. Ordinance No. AZ 04-015 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 1 +/- acre from RUT to R-8 zone for proposed Secret Garden Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc. - 2490 North Locust Grove: 19. Ordinance No. Regulations Revision: Sewer Use and Service 20. Ordinance No. Regulations Revision: Water Use and Service Meridian City Council Agenda - October 5, 2004 Page 3 of3 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property ofthe City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documentB and/or hearing please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. October 22, 2004 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT October 26, 2004 ITEM NO. 5-8 REQUEST Approve Minutes of October 4, 2004 City Council / ACHD Commission Special Joint Meeting AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: CITY PARKS DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: OTHER: ~~ Contacted: Emailed: Date: Staff Initials; Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. CITY OF MERIDIAN I ACHD COMMISSION JOINT MEETING I WORKSHOP AGENDA MONDAY, October 4,2004 -12:00 P.M. ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT AUDITORIUM 3775 ADAMS STREET GARDEN CITY, IDAHO Update on Current & Future Projects in Meridian ACHD (Hansen) II Update on Meridian Transportation Management Plan City of Meridian I ACHD III Discussion of Storm Water Retention Ponds - Maintenance and Landscaping Issues City of Meridian I ACHD (Mills I Brown) IV Other (time permitting) Meridian City Council & ACHD Commission Meetina October 4. 2004 The Meridian City Council and ACHD Commission Joint Meeting I Workshop was called to order at 12:00 P.M. on Monday, October 4,2004 by Mayor Tammy de Weerd and ACHD Commission President John Franden. Members Present: Mayor Tammy de Weerd, Keith Bird, Shaun Wardle and Charlie Rountree. Staff Present: Brad Watson, Anna Canning, Bill Nary and Will Berg. ACHD Commission Members Present: John Franden, David Wynkoop, Dave Bivens and Susan Eastlake. Roll-call Attendance: Vacant X Keith Bird X Shaun Wardle X Charlie Rountree X Mayor Tammy de Weerd Franden: Welcome, Mayor De Weerd and City Council members from Meridian. It's good to have you and Bill we are sorry that you have been ostracized from the rectangle table. Nary: I can see from back here. Franden: It was your choice, right? But, anyway, congratulations to Bill on his appointment as City Attorney. De Weerd: And congratulations from us. Franden: Maybe what we should do is just quickly we will go around and introduce ourselves. Well, I guess not. I kind of thought that it was a little bit like Church, where you had the Meridian people on one side and ACHD on the other, but I think we are mixed. Anyway, we will start with Dave Wynkoop. Wynkoop: Dave Wynkoop. Bivens: Dave Bivens. Rountree: Charlie Rountree. Bird: Keith Bird. Wardle: Shaun Wardle. ( Meridian City Council I ACHU Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 2 of 27 Eastlake: Susan Eastlake. De Weerd: Tammy De Weerd. Franden: And John Franden. The first item that we have on our agenda is update on current and future projects in the Meridian area. Mr. Hansen? Item 1. Update on Current & Future Projects in Meridian - ACHD (Hansen): Hansen: Thank you Mr. President, Madame Mayor, Commissioners and Council members. My name is Dorrell Hansen I am the assistant manager of engineering here at the Highway District. I am going to update you on some of the projects that we have got going in Meridian this year. These next two slides are just a list of the ones that we are going to be going through. As you can see, it's a pretty large list. We will start off with the Overland Road project. Eagle to Touchmark Way - this is a view aerial that was taken last Thursday. That's Eagle Road and you are facing to the east. This is the portion that is under construction right now, This project was originally scheduled to go from Eagle to Cloverdale and it was originally scheduled to be built in 2006, however, the construction of this first half mile was moved up to accommodate the Silverstone Development and that did require and I will go over it a little bit later - that did require that we delay the Franklin Road from Eagle to Touchmark. At this point and time, the roadway is being constructed five lanes with curb, gutter, sidewalk and bike lanes and it's being constructed by the developer. It's not an ACHD project, it's a developer project in the developer project and the developer will be reimbursed by impact fees for the project. The project is paid out at this point and time. We have traffic back on it. The traffic is running the middle three lanes. The two outside lanes are still closed down because they are finishing up sidewalks, pet ramps and landscaping. We hope to have the road totally open for traffic by October 15th. The next project is the Franklin Road project from Main to Nola. This is again at Eagle Road, only we are facing to the west. This was actually two different projects. The project from Main to Nola was a project and then the second project was from Nola to Eagle Road here. Main to Nola is close to completion, They got about 600 feet of curb, gutter and sidewalk on the north side to complete. You can kind of see that uncompleted phase right there and from Nola to Eagle the traffic is being routed onto the two brand new lanes that are on the south side of the road, while the water and storm drain goes onto the north side. Hope to start curbing the sidewalk on the north side this week. The new (inaudible) poles at Eagle Road are up and operational and on October 8th at 6:00 p.m. we are going to go in and close this intersection to the west down. That's a Friday evening. We plan on having the intersection closed down from Friday evening at 6:00 to 5:00 Monday morning on the 11th because this is to accommodate the first 300 feet of construction there. It's a very tight area to be constructing in and we decided it would really impact traffic the least if we went ahead and just closed it down for a weekend and let the contractor get in t. ,. Meridian City Council I ACRu Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 3 of 27 there and get it done. After this roadwork is completed for the season, you will see that there is one left turn lane and one three lane on Westbound - excuse me Eastbound on Franklin that is going to be blocked at the Eagle intersection and that's because we don't have the improvements on the East side completed and so there is no place for them to go, so even though the project will be done for the year, you are still going to see barrels up out there and I think we decided to use barrels rather than paint because we can take the barrels down next spring or next summer when we get the rest of the project completed. We hope to have this project completed by November 4h. (Speaker?): Dorrell, that corner there on the - I was noticing the other day on the southwest corner - is that going to be a 90 degree corner when it's finished or is it going to be a sweeping right hand turn? Hansen: The free right hand turn lane is being taken out as far as this project. (Speaker?): It is being taken out? Hansen: Yes it is. This is the remainder of the project that was originally scheduled to be completed this year, but as I said before it was delayed to accommodate the Overland Road project. We expect to start construction on this after school is out in June of 2005 and hope to have it done before school opens back up. The reason for that is that we are going to allow the contractor to close this section of the road down and the detour route will be up there on Pine and so we want the detour route not to be during school time when there is children coming and going from that school up there on Pine. Next we have Eagle Road from - excuse me Victory Road to the Ridenbaugh Canal. Eagle Road from Overland Road to the Ridenbaugh Canal was constructed last year by the developers of Silverstone and EI Dorado. This project will construct the remaining section between the canal and Victory Road. This project will widen the road five lanes with curb, gutter and sidewalk and bike lanes and that includes a rebuild to the Ridenbaugh Canal bridge. We are also going to build the Eagle Road and Victory Road intersection with this project and that will be a five by five intersection. For this fiscal year '05 we plan on going out and purchasing right of way for these two projects and they are currently scheduled to be built in fiscal year '06. Next project is Franklin Road from Ten Mile to Linder, This project is not currently in our five year work program, however, we budgeted money in fiscal year '05 to prepare a concept report to see if we can't get the project into the federal aid program and if we can get into the federal aid program and federal aid becomes available, (inaudible) advanced acquisition of right of way and potentially even construct it. Under the current schedule if we can't do any advance right of way or construction, the design was set for fiscal year '06 and '07, the right of way acquisitions for fiscal year '08 and '09 in construction is currently in PD. The next project is Franklin Road from Touchmark to Five Mile, This is a federal aid project and it's going to expand the road to five lanes, with curb, gutter and sidewalks and a safety shoulder. They will also include ( Meridian City Council! ACflu Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 4 of 27 intersection work at the Cloverdale and Five Mile intersections. In the fiscal year '05 we anticipate completing the design work and we have right of way acquisitions scheduled for '07 and '08 and construction in '09. Locus Grove, Bentley to Franklin - this is the next phase in Locust Grove Overpass projects and this project is scheduled to be constructed in '05 and it will widen the roadway to five lanes. The next phase to that project will be the Locust Grove Overpass. This is a federal aid project and it's with contributions from the City of Meridian and lTD. The bridge will be built to four lanes and it will connect into five lane roads on both sides and by the time we get to this project next year the roadways on both sides will be done. The acquisition is expected to be completed this year in FY '05 and we anticipated and as construction to this project in FY '06. Next project is Locust Grove, Franklin to Fairview. Actually this is from Lanark to Fairview. We have made the improvements from Franklin to Lanark as part of the Franklin Road project this year and so this project will hook onto those and construct a new roadway from Lanark north to Pine and rebuild the existing roadway from Pine to Fairview. There will be a five-lane road, curb, gutters and sidewalks and it will include some improvements on Pine and a signal at Pine and a brand new railroad crossing. Now the new railroad crossing on Locust Grove is going to require that we close down the railroad crossing on Nola and that slide is not correct, that's not Locust Grove on the bottom that is actually Nola and we will have to close down that railroad crossing when we build this new one and that is going to require us cul-de-sac -ing the road on both sides of that. Overland Road, Topaz to Cloverdale. This will widen the roadway to five lanes with curb, gutter and sidewalk. The improvements to the Cloverdale on Overland Road intersection will actually be completed this year as part of our Cloverdale Road project and so this project will improve the roadway from those intersection improvements to the improvements that the developer is putting in this year up to Topaz. Right of way acquisition is scheduled for this year and construction in '06. This project will be constructed along with our project from - which is a widening project from over on Overland from Cloverdale and Five Mile there is an existing three lanes out there. We are going to go ahead and widen that out to five lanes at the same time as we build this project. When these two projects are complete, we will have Overland Road improved from Meridian Road to the west. Meridian Road to the east we have the Overland Road project from Meridian to Linder. This project will widen the roadway to five lanes with curb, gutter and sidewalk and bike lanes. They will include a 5 x 3 intersection at Stoddard and the design for this will be completed this year by in house staff and that is why this project does not appear in our capital budget this year because the design is being done in house. Right of way acquisition will be scheduled for FY '06 and construction in FY '07. Ten Mile from Franklin Road to Cherry Lane - this is going to widen the roadway to five lanes with curb, gutter and sidewalk and includes intersection improvements to a 5 x 5 at Franklin and a 4 x 5 at Pine. This project is also being designed by in house staff. Right of way acquisition is going to be in FY '05 and '06 and construction in FY '07. ( Meridian City Council I ACHU Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 5 of 27 EastJake: Madame Mayor. One of the things that concerns me about us going ahead and designing a road like this is that we are designing it assuming it's going to be a road and yet, Ten Mile, obviously is one of the potential locations for ITO to actually have the connection all the way down and once we design this and by right of way and don't buy access - you know if ITO was buying it because they were going to do a limited access roadway and might buy access rights, but we don't buy access rights from property owners, so I think that we need to be real clear that once ACHD designs this road and builds this road under our regular five lane road standard it would be hard for it to be statewide. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. Franden: Madame Mayor. De Weerd: It's the City's intentions through our north Meridian plan and through our comp plan that Ten Mile would not be that connection. It would be Black Cat or another road that we would work with ITO that would designate, but it would be helpful to get ITD, ACHD and the City together to really start solidifying that vision so that these kinds of things can work and compliment each other. East/ake: So, some place south of Franklin a road is going to connect to a Ten Mile intersection? Is that what your comp plan envisions? De Weerd: I believe that shows something maybe north of Franklin coming into Ten Mile. Anna do you know? Canning: -- (inaudible) a dotted line or anything like that, but I think that the discussion we had and in the community (inaudible ------------) somewhere out after that railroad crossing (inaudible--------------------). Eastlake: Mr. President, do we know whether we are taking that into account of all (inaudible----)? Franden: Dorrell will have to answer that one. There seems to me there is an awful lot of decisions that haven't been made. What we are talking about is Highway 16 coming across, right? And joining up some place at Ten Mile for the Ten Mile overpass and interchange. Rountree: Well it doesn't necessarily have to be Ten Mile. It could be another access point. Franden: It could be Black Cat? Rountree: It could be Black Cat. It could be McDermott, It could be Star Road or Robinson Road. That's just a matter of going through the exercises of getting access onto the Interstate, so- ( ~- ( , '.' \ Meridian City Council! ACHO Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 6 of 27 East/ake: Mr. President. So, continuing this, if we are just moving forward assuming Ten Mile is going to be a regular ACHD road that has a connection at in (inaudible) at the Interstate at Ten Mile. What I hear you say is that that had in no way changes the possibility that Highway 16 might come across and have an access onto the Interstate someplace else. Rountree: It's possible, but there are other alternatives. Ten Mile is not a particularly easy alternative at this point given the fact that you have Spur Wing at one end and that development and all of the development that is essentially north of Pine. East/ake: And there really could be two intersections just a mile apart because Meridian has really enough of an urban area that like Boise that has intersections at Vista and Broadway and Orchard and it's possible that we could- Bird: You mean interchanges? Eastlake: Yes, interchanges just a mile apart. You think? Rountree: The past policy is that every two miles- Eastlake: Well, I know but Boise has (inaudible--) - Rountree: - there seems to be some softening about every mile at this point. What are the alternative that looks the best in terms of (inaudible-------) jurisdictions between cities and counties that are connections across the river and those sorts of things? Franden: Mr. Bivens. Bivens: Mr. Chairman, it appears to me that this schedule is pretty much in line with what is occurring and ITD has the study going on where that the location of that interchange is going to (inaudible) and to me this mayor may not be Ten Mile as it stands today, it may be there or somewhere else. So, to me the planning schedule is about right on course and that (inaudible) study - Charlie, when is that going to be back? Rountree: I don't have a date on the top of my head here. I am thinking that probably it's eight months out. Bivens: Okay, I guess I had the month of April floating around. April or May- Rountree: That could be. I could check, but I don't recall at this point. ( Meridian City Council! AcRu Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 7 of 27 Bivens: Anyway, I think that when we get that - this planning that is going on, I think it would be probably right in line with what we are doing. Franden: Mr. Wynkoop. Wynkoop: The point is still well taken, but we don't want to waste money on either a design or acquisition of right of way that ends up at cross purposes with the findings of the !TD studies. So, I guess back to Dorrell just in terms of coordinating the timing on those two, when did you say that we are working on design and is that consistent with the timing of the conclusions from the ITD study? Hansen: Mr. President and Commissioner Eastlake. To begin with this is being designed as a five lane arterial local roadway. We are not taking into consideration anything with regard to lTD. (Speaker unknown): Are you designing it now? Hansen: We are designing it now. And it will - we are planning right of way acquisition in '05 and '06 and then construction in '07. De Weerd: I think you are designing it correctly. In our comprehensive plan, we had no intention for that to be a state highway. Look at the land usage and it isn't and certainly I would encourage our staff's to all get together and start looking at it. We will be addressing it, I am sure, in the long-range plan, but I guess in the north Meridian pl8;n and in our camp plan we envisioned it would not be Ten Mile. Ten Mile would be an interchange site and that any connection from Highway 16 could also if it did have it's own direct access who would (inaudible) and those wanting to go to the East Wood go to Ten Mile and those going to the left, would go to McDermott. Those were the two points that were identified in the 1-84 Corridor Study. That's kind of the assumptions that we were working off of. Franden: Keith? Bird: I basically would say the same thing. We have never seen a scenario where that section at Ten Mile would ever be part of a state highway and I hope you guys will continue on doing what you are doing and keep on schedule with it because I don't - I think it would be - all the scenarios have been south of Franklin Road where they have tied in from Black Cat. Rountree: That's the tough piece, south of Franklin. I think this design concept is consistent. Hansen: If I may back up one slide I forgot to mention on this Overland Road, Meridian to Linder project, we will also improve the intersection of Meridian and Overland Road at the same time we build this project in '07 and that is going to Meridian City Council! ACHU Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 8 of 27 be improved to a 7 x 7 intersection. The next project is Black Cat Road from Franklin to Cherry Lane. This is going to be a cooperative project and it is going to be constructed by the City of Meridian with their sewer improvements on Black Cat Road and ACHD will participate in the project to improve the gravel base that's in the roadway and also share in the new paving on the roadway. This project is going to be constructed this fiscal year. Eastlake: How many lanes? Hansen: We will put it back to the same number of lanes - two lanes. Next we have State Highway 69 or Meridian Road and Victory Road and this project is in just to add a signal to the intersection. Don't anticipate any roadwork on State Highway 69, maybe a little bit of widening on Victory Road, We plan to design this and potentially even construct it in this fiscal year. This is State Highway 20/26, Chinden and the Meridian intersection. This is an ITD project. The north lane of the intersection will be realigned to better match up with the south (inaudible). They are going to install our right hand turn lane from westbound Chinden onto northbound Meridian and the project has already been awarded to Central Paving and there is going to be a start date of October 4th, so that's today and a completion date of December 17th, The last thing I have is some overlay projects that we are going to be doing. We have two different overlay projects. We have got our federal aid overlays and we have got our local overlays. It's part of our federal overlays in '05. We will be overlaying Ustick Road from Linder to Meridian and then as part of our local overlays, we will be overlaying Linder Road from Turtle Creek to Ustick and also as part of our local overlays we will be doing Fairview to Locust Grove to Eagle Road. That concludes my presentation. I would be more than happy to answer any questions. Franden: Any questions for Dorrell? Ms, Eastlake? Eastlake: Back in the very beginning, you talked about designing something in hopes of getting different (inaudible) - if we possibly (inaudible----------). And you talked just a little bit about how much federal aid we have programmed and how much we might get if the new T21 or whatever they call it, passes? Hansen: Mr. President, Commissioner Eastlake. I am going to defer to Katie Levihn. Levihn: Hello, Katie Levihn for the record. President and Mayor and other members present here. The project that Dorrell is talking about actually did get programmed at the end of the year here in federal aid for PD. That's why we are starting the concept report now and the latest on T21 reauthorization is we just met with Federal Highways this morning on a different matter, but of course that is the topic that is of interest to everyone. There has been a continuing resolution to keep going until November 20th fully funded. II's actually been extended to continue the program until May 31 S\ but that is going to take an [ Meridian City Council I ACHO Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 9 of 27 additional set of continuing resolutions to keep it going. So, at this point we don't know what is going to happen with T21. Everyone is crossing their fingers that we will get additional funding and we are trying to position ourselves with that through this round of putting projects like this one that Dorrell is talking about and preparing other ones to submit through COMPASS for the adding into the program. I wish I could be more definitive. Franden: Thanks, Katey. Any other questions for Dorrell? De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. Franden: Mayor. De Weerd: I guess our staff and myself and commissioners too. Your staff met (inaudible) future projects and talked about some of the future funds that had been (inaudible) up to ask about intersection improvements in our north Meridian area and it just doesn't seem like the north Meridian area can ever get off the center point and we are really interested to see how we can work together to get some relief up there in congestions and see how we could playa role in that and working with the development community. Again, we have this open (inaudible) finding out there that we would like to utilize and it doesn't seem like we are getting anywhere. A second one as we looked on updates the safety bussing at Sawtooth Elementary has been working okay, but there is still after school activities, there is still a lot of congestion when those kids are walking to and from those after school activities and a number of parents had contacted my office to see when that pathway, that temporary pathway that was talked about was going to go in and I think I understood now that they didn't think it was needed, so it's now not going to go in and there is concern about that. The parents that have been driving their kids, anticipating at some point that path will be going in so the kids could walk. So, I would like an update on those two items, Franden: Well, the first one would be on the intersections and what we did when we reallocated dollars and then where we might be in the future. Terry can you tell us, or maybe whoever, which intersections we added in on the reallocation? Mike has got it. Okay. Bruce, I know your people did a survey and spent some time out there taking a look at children who were walking and children that were also using bicycles and if my memory is correct the number of walking was one and the number using bicycle was one, so Bruce brought that to us. Mayor we just felt at this time that there are so many needs out there, not that this isn't a legitimate need, but there is a number of them out there that are even prior to- we just felt that the expenditure of dollars, that $30,000 on our part we couldn't justify it at this point and time. I believe - did we also ask you to go back through, Bruce, and ask Meridian and the school district to - (inaudible) so we just decided right at this time it didn't appear to be warranted. Meridian City Council I ACHD Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 10 of 27 De Weerd: I guess since we tried to get communication out in front to the parents, I know there was a lot of concern. This was brought up at several parent/teacher meetings, PT A meetings between the principal and the parents. They knew it was a temporary solution and they have been driving their kids. Now, I guess if the understanding was that was going to go in and maybe they have been temporarily finding other solutions with the anticipation with that pathway going in, but the calls I have been getting are more of those that are in football or after school activities that are walking not during that (inaudible) as they get out of school at areas for times - I don't know when your survey was, but they are walking and at that time of day it's more the rush hour peak traffic that they are dealing with and there continues to be concern. So, I don't know how to respond to you, but these parents need to know then that plans are changing because that is their understanding coming into it as was the school districts. Franden: Ms. Eastlake. Eastlake: First of all, I am not familiar with the area, so I don't have the specifics, but we have had a process of prioritizing - they brought to school projects and that I don't know for six or seven years at least but the Terry has kept a list and my concern here is how did this school get the impression that they were somehow going to get moved up to the front of the list or - I mean, certainly the school district knew that when they built the school there that there were no sidewalks, there was nothing, no place for the kids to walk when they chose to build the school there. We didn't have a road project there or any sign that they were going to build sidewalks so I don't know how they got the impression that they were going to move to the front of the list and get some kind of solution before all these other schools, who have been asking for many, many years to get improvements to get their kids walking to school. De Weerd: Do you want me to answer that? Franden: Sure. De Weerd: From ACHD. We had a meeting with the schools, with Ada County Highway District and the City. Eastlake: We being Meridian? We and the school district? De Weerd: ACHD. Eastlake: And who from ACHD? De Weerd: Who all was there? r Meridian City Council I AChtJ Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 11 of 27 Speaker?: Mr. Wynkoop, myself, Bruce, Commissioner Bivens, I believe. Were you there that day? (Inaudible discussion -----) Speaker?: Who would you like to attend that meeting? So, that's what the commission came up with. Speaker?: If I might go ahead - Eastlake: Yeah, but that's after the school was already built. Speaker?: This was just two months ago. De Weerd: In July. Franden: So, what we had, Tammy kind of started this out by saying we have got an emergency here and so with the Commission's direction, we - two of the Commissioners met with Linda Clark and her staff and Tammy and some of her staff, we looked at that and we asked Bruce to come back with some possible suggestions and look at that as whether it was an emergency. Bruce came back with a couple of ideas including that path. Everybody thought that that was a good idea to try to accommodate the emergency. I think it may have been one of the meetings you were not at Ms. Eastlake. We did discuss this as a whole Commission. Eastlake: Oh, no, I remember discussing it, but at that point had the parents already been told they were getting a path? Franden: So, the update, then was we asked Bruce to take a look at what is the actual usage and Bruce and his staff took a look at that after school started and concluded that the usage was very minimal. Also, the Meridian School District provided us with information that they were able to do the safety bussing, which of course doesn't necessarily help with the after school activities. So, the new information is that in terms of the overall priority system we have got, there are situations all over the valley where we have missing sidewalks that need to be addressed. So, we have a program to do that and put it into that priority system, The question with respect to Sawtooth Middle School is do we have an emergency? And I believe the Commission after it received the briefing from our staff concluded that we do not have an emergency. The second piece of information was at that joint meeting, we had discussed about some kind of a cost sharing arrangement and as certainly as to be expected, the Meridian School District said we've spent our budget on this project so we would not be able to be a participant in any kind of cost sharing and essentially, Mayor, the City communicated to us that well that's what ACHD gets paid taxes for, so we are not sure it is appropriate to the City to do a cost sharing. So, basically, with I Meridian City Council! AChLJ Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 12 of 27 that information and kind of the new information that it did not appear to be as urgent an emergency as we first thought it might be, At that point, we concluded as a Commission that we will put it in the regular program, but that this isn't a crisis that has to be addressed immediately. Or, alternatively, how do you argue that it's a higher priority crisis than some of the other needs that have been (inaudible). De Weerd: I guess just to add to that the City did (inaudible) the funds, the portion that ACHD came to us on the sidewalk program as a partner to solutions like this and also I mentioned our funding at that time, but we do want to bring solutions to the table and we felt we were doing our part, work with funding the study. It was communicated to the parents once those decisions were made at parent meetings because parents were very concerned about the safety and the walking and the topography out there was very low shoulders and you know, it's a big safety concern. So, this is your PR thing. It's not mine. I have gotten several phone calls and I did get an email from Bruce and I have passed it on to those couple parents that it looks like this, but I am not going to have anything to do with it. I had asked your staff last spring that we come to the table and start looking at this because, yeah, school is plopped right in the middle of nowhere and this should be our lesson learned that now anything future we need to take a look at this and the development community needs to be a part of it. School District, they stepped up and they felt there funding portion was the safety bussing and at which is a pretty penny to them as well. So, we do have these parents driving their kids to school and they thought it was temporary. If I have to telf them you better start dumping them out on the street, so they can show up in your counts, I don't know. I don't think that's a solution. I thought we were all moving forward - I'm sorry, I am a little bit too direct, I think - Eastlake: I bet there are other Meridian Schools that are already in on this where kids are walking - they are being safety bussed probably and they are walking if they are staying for after school programs and stuff like that. I doubt that this is the only Meridian School that has got that problem, Bird: Excuse me, Mr. President. It's not only the City of Meridian that has got this problem. I am like the Mayor, I wouldn't attempt to let my kids walk there now. I would take them and that's what's happening. But, two wrongs don't make a right. We made a wrong when we let the facility go in without thinking ahead to do this, but that don't make it right. It's unsafe and I don't know of any other schools in the City of Meridian that is even close to this as far as being unsafe. Franden: Mr. Wardle. Wardle: Mr. President, thank you, Commissioner Eastlake. One of the concerns with this school is that it's on a major collector with the river crossing with large traffic counts and there are no sidewalks and very narrow shoulders. So, ( Meridian City Council! ACHu Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 13 of 27 certainly I understand your concerns about other schools and where they are in the process, but I think this is a unique situation that we all realize. Just to ask one thing. I would like to know if we could get a briefing or a copy of that study and the parameters that were used to measure that pedestrian count. Certainly, those numbers - if you run them around any school district, I would say that those seem very low as even an average for any school. It would be interesting to see that study. Bivens: I have driven this area and certainly it isn't a safe way for our children to walk. However, I guess the point that Mayor De Weerd makes is the school district is currently furnishing bussing to help alleviate what is believed to be an emergency safety problem. That, no doubt, is costing them quite a bit. I think one of the fall backs is I think there is a cost - what's the cost, $30,OOO? I think that was the projected cost to accomplish what Meridian had asked. I guess there was one alternate thought that if there was a willingness to partner own - the reason I bring this up - the cost of the school district if they continue to do that it might be more beneficial and cheaper in the long run if they could be a part of the process of helping to fund what it appears to be a not as a serious as it looks. And of course, without the bussing it would be much different. I guess that's a thought and maybe with the City and the school district participation, (inaudible-----) we could still get it accomplished (inaudible -------------------), Franden: Commissioner Eastlake, Eastlake: Do we have any indication? My recollection was that the $30,000 was just to go from an intersection up to the school on one side of the road. Do we have any indication that the safety bussing would stop if there was just that much? Because the kids are coming - the kids aren't just coming from that intersection. The kids are coming down every street to get to that intersection. I mean, I don't think they are going to stop the safety bussing if we just put that little bit of pavement in there, so it doesn't seem to me like it solves the problem. Franden: You know, Mayor De Weerd, I don't - my memory may be faltering, but I don't - It's not clear to me that ACHO said that we will do that project. I don't know who in the world told the parents that the Highway District would do that project. I do know that we were exploring getting a split of some kind where everybody could participate eventually and it concerns me that somebody might have been out there saying that we were going to do it when 1 don't know that that commitment had been made. De Weerd: I don't know when they talked about it at the parent/teacher, but when I walked away from that meeting, it couldn't be done in September, it would have to be done after the overlays and that was going to be in October. Franden: The thing I remember when we walked away from that meeting was that we were going to support cost sharing and that we were going to see what ( ( Meridian City Council! ACnO Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting. October 4, 2004 Page 14 of 27 could we do. You know, what could be done on a non-expensive basis and came out the gravel would be a possibility to do, but I don't like being put into a position by somebody saying that we would do something and I am not sure that we said that. The other thing that really irritates me is that this project went ahead of building a school and I am not sure that - and we may have been, but I am not sure that the Highway District was brought in as a (inaudible) partner on that at that point and time as far as safety was concerned. Now, I just feel almost like - you know that the person that somebody went and bought a dog next door and now I have got to build a great big fence to keep the dog out of my yard. It just kind of irritates me a little bit. De Weerd: I think everyone was caught with their tail hanging out there. The school district, the Highway District and the City. We all approved this project being put there and no one really looked at how things were going to connect to it. I certainly know we learned something through our planning staff and City Council that we may take a look at it, but we don't really plan the sidewalks, we like you, have sometimes just a narrow look at it, but we all need to start looking a little bit farther and this one project certainly opened our eyes to that and I think it opened all of our eyes to it. Franden: I will just say one more thing and then let others. But, your are absolutely right. We have got so many needs in the area of sidewalks around our schools throughout this county that is unbelievable and one of the things that we have done is that we have gone in for a five million dollar request to HUD and for our congressional delegation to help us to get money; to start getting larger blocks of money, so we can address these problems throughout the county. One idea that came up when we were meeting with Eagle a couple of weeks ago was that we, as the Highway District and the cities and the county that we come up with a list of things and a presentation that we can make to our congressional delegation as a whole, as the cities, all of us to Jet that congressional delegation understand how desperate some of these needs are and solicit theif help, So, that's one way that we are going to get the money that we really need to have to do these things right. (Inaudible -------------------) Wynkoop: Two points. One is theirs is kind of quicker funding for safety bussing that I (inaudible -------) out there and I don't purport to be an expert on the latest developments in that, but one thing we might want to check and be careful about is we don't want to build a pathway that turns out maybe not to be a total solution, but that it at least provides some access such that the school district loses it's safety bussing and funding. They get reimbursed for state authorized safety bussing and so when I found out at the meeting that the school district- (Tape turned over) Wynkoop: -- create a more serious safety problem than now exists. But, the path itself was never going to be the total safety solution here. It was a helpl but ( Meridian City Council! ACl1uCommission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 15 of 27 there is other safety issues in the Valley and I don't know the answers on that, but we don't want to inadvertently through that (inaudible -----) and create an even more unsafe situation. Then second, I guess, is the point that I think everybody is making is that we do need to learn lessons from this - I think all three agencies and certainly there is a new statute that was adopted to kind of post date the approval of Sawtooth, I think it just took effect just recentlYI but I believe our staff is going to be looking much more carefully at the bigger picture. Not just the access points. I mean, I think we were all in this kind of box where here is the things we look at. This has opened our eyes to say here is a new subset of things that we better look at because this isn't going to be the last one that were are going to see. If you look at the Meridian School District's inventory of available sites, many of their sites are going to be on this same situation. They can't wait to buy a site until the road has been built to five lanes and the subdivisions have all been built out. They have got to somehow get that site before the whole area is fully developed with subdivisions and roads. This is going to be just a really ongoing thing where we are going to see many of these very kinds of sites, especially from middle and high schools. The elementaries they are trying to put more in the middle of subdivisions so usually by the time the school is built you will have much of the curb, gutter, sidewalks built, but for their middle schools and their high schools all their sites are going to be just like this one_ They are going to be probably mid-mile and on an arterial someplace and they are caught in that dilemma of timing of there won't be curb, gutter and sidewalks. There will be the old narrow two-lane railroad, so until it's fully developed out, how do we safely get kids to those school sites because they have to build the school at some point before total build out. This very scenario is going to be repeated and I think what we are all going to have to do, school districts and ACHD is really look at this a lot more carefully and figure out how to do some interim safety measures until the build out occurs. It's not going to be simple and ies going to involve money. Franden: Ms. Eastlake. Eastlake: Just to follow up on what Mr. Wynkoop was saying. We have the problem that a school district comes in with an application. They are going to access onto a public street. Our only legal ability is to require them to improve the site the (inaudible) of buying their property. We cannot exact from them offsite improvements like we can exact from a developer offsite improvements unless they are directly related to the impact that they are having. So, they come in mid mile and it's a quarter of mile to the intersection both directions and there is no sidewalks and we have no mobility. First of all, we don't own the right of way, probably. We can't require the property owner's to give us right of way. We can't require the school to buy it. We can't require the school to build it. I mean, we have got private property rights. We've got (inaudible) issues. We have got exaction issues. I am not sure if we were where we are today and the school is coming in today that we have a solution to this problem. So, this is what Dave is talking about. We had better start looking at the big picture. But, I am not sure Meridian City Council! ACHD Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 16 of 27 we have the tools. We know exactly what the problem is. I am not sure that we have the tools to solve it. So, it is going to be a continuing problem, if in fact the schools are going to be located on two lane rural roads where there are no improvements and where development has not fully built out a (inaudible). De Weerd: So, knowing all this, we'd better get our staffs together with the school district. Start identifying where these future school sites are, how they are phasing them in and seeing how we can connect and seeing how we can bring solutions to this because it is - as rapidly as that school district is growing, we will have future projects just like this. We had better be prepared and I heard they bought a site up on McMillan along that wonderful huge ditch and so we definitely know we have a future issue up there. So, if all of staffs can get together and start seeing how and what solutions we can bring to it and even if it is grant eligible to start even pursuing it in that fashion, but we have to find something. Eastlake: But then what I wanted to finish with is I am not sure that we want to be in the position of building just wider shoulders_ I am not a person who thinks we are not maybe taking on liability. By just building wide shoulders and having fifth/sixth graders walking down wide shoulders and saying that solved the problem. I mean sidewalks have got a reason that they are - they have got a curb and they are separated from the street is because kids tend to wander around when they are walking to school. They don't stay in some little narrow line and I am not sure just how many shoulders is (inadudible----). Bivens: Just as a follow up to again having been on both sides of this, I certainly don't want to create a problem for the school district that I feel a very high degree of loyalty to, but it may come to a point where if consequences of locating on a rural two lane section it could may be that the school district will have to put into their bond some calculation for at least some of the facilities that there were some way to even partner with ACHD findings so that we are not after the fact looking at that because their dilemma is once they have spent all the bond proceeds on a site, they have no way of doing these things. But, it may be in order to get the cheaper ground by going a little bit ahead of the development cycle it may be that one of the costs ends up being that they are going to have to figure out a way to add into the bond cost some of the pedestrian facility or maybe there are some other solutions, but I think that the idea is excellent that we really ought to urge you a task force between our staff, Wendell and his staff and Anna and her staff to try to say look this is going happen again, now what lessons have we learned from this and what are we going to do next time? Speaker?: I think we really got that already started. We got that started that day we met with (inaudible----). Bivens: How we do anything or-? /r .~ ( Meridian City Council! ACHO Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 17 of 27 Speaker?: Communication started - Bivens: Bruce is there a formal working group on this yet or -? Mills: Mr. President, Madame Mayor. No, there is not an official one yet. We have met with the Meridian School (inaudible---------) the new state statute just came out a year and one half ago, I believe, that says that we must address these issues in a lot more detail than the developer must. The Highway District is tasked with looking at all those issues (inaudible------) the development comes forward for a school site, pedestrian all of the pedestrian crossing issues, bicycles - there is about 20 different items that has to be addressed. We have met with Wendell Began of the school district to talk about those items so that in the future development of (inaudible) brings forward he is going to have to hire a traffic engineer to address a lot of those issues and they will be addressed in more detail in the reports that we get that we pass along to the city that we bring along to the commission. Bivens: But I think a working group. at least the three parties, sit down and say how are we going to address this in the future? We are very much open to ideas, but one possibility may be that you have got to put in some funding in your bond calculations and that's usually two, three or four years ahead of the site opening and it may actually be even at the land acquisition stage. It may be that the school district is going to have to formulate in the cost benefit of a particular site acquisition, while we can get this site that maybe has already some pedestrian facilities or we can get this site, but if we get this site we are going to have to factor into it some additional costs where the creation of a pedestrian facility. I am- Eastlake: Because that's just a Meridian School - Bivens: But, this is like three, four or five years ahead planning of a school opening - Eastlake: David, is this a Kuna school problem as well and a Boise school problem as well or are we just not (inaudible-------) - Bivens: It's not a Boise school problem because Boise is not building any new schools at the present (inaudible-------) Bird: Boise should be included because we got as many facilities in the city limits of Boise as we do in Meridian. Bivens: They are all pretty well built out areas. Franden: Well, in the interest of time we will keep - the thing that I just wanted to emphasize is we are all very sensitive to the problem. We all are concerned. ( Meridian City Council! ACAuCommisston Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 18 of 27 We all are parents. We all understand, but one of the main things, Mayor, is the counts for one thing, didn't warrant. The other is that there are so many that are before this one that need to be addressed. So, somehow we will figure out how to tackle all of these as we go. Okay? Thank you. De Weerd: Just as long as you communicate with the school and deal with them, right? Franden: Don't you want to? De Weerd: This is your thing. Not mine_ I usually just facilitate. Franden: Oh, okay, okay_ Item 2. Update on Meridian Transportation Management Plan - City of Meridian/ACHD: De Weerd: Who was updating on the transportation plan? Bird: City of Meridian. Canning: President, Mayor and others present. I like the way that Katey said that that shortened everything up quite a bit. I was hoping our new transportation planner was going to give you the update today, but he is in Disneyland with his family, so that was a good thing_ So, I can give you a brief update and hopefully the ACHD members of the staff that are on the Steering Committee with me can help me out as needed and that would be Terry and Bruce. On Thursday the Steering Committee met with the consultants and they showed us their presentation that they would be giving later that night and it really was a great presentation on traffic modeling and what goes into the models and showing that it's not a black box, there really is something that goes on in that black box and how the numbers come out; very informative, great slideshow and then just as background information and then we went through - they had nine listed, but it was probably about 15 different alternatives that they wanted the Steering Committee to review and pick six of those that they would go forward and do the modeling on. So, we did go through those. We had a lot of discussion and in the end we had quite a bit of consensus from the Steering Committee on where we wanted to go and then the hope was that that night they would take the presentation to the general public and they would get some ideas, if we'd missed anything along the way_ Unfortunately, it was the night of the debates and they had a miserable turnout. They only had eight people show up and this is compared to 40 or 50 people that they had been getting for these things in the past. So, they were very disappointed in that and I'll leave it at that. The scenarios that they are going forward with and this is where Terry and Bruce will come in handy, if I can remember the six. One was just going with the transportation improvements that are planned. So, that is kind of the no change ( Meridian City Council I AGhU Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 19 of 27 scenario. One would be the five-lane Meridian Road. Another one was kind of a innovative couplet that they had come up with that wasn't going through downtown, it would end before downtown, but it would facilitate the left-hand turns that are westbound on Franklin to all that development kind of on the west end of town, which was one of the issues that came up in their preliminary analysis as important. Another one was the original couplet as proposed by ACHD a number of years ago. They were going to look at a round-a-bout at the Corporate - Meridian - Main intersection just because that's really the only way to deal with the Waltman Lane issues, so they did want to look at that as one of the alternatives and then a 3rd street connection extension of grd to 2 % or just extending 3rd is another one. So, those were the primary ones. We had a lot of discussion about four lane Meridian verses five lane and could that be kind of incorporated into one scenario and then we were able to pull some things into the general discussion as the base case scenario and some of those were Waltman Lane, right in right out only and some other just kind of standard improvements that we felt should be added to the base case scenario. So, that was the recommendations out of the Steering Committee. When they took it to the general public, they commented the most on the kind of modified couplet and just kind of had this how on earth will that ever work out feeling about it. So, they weren't too keen on that. Most of the - but, I think that what they got was on a four lane verses five lane Meridian Road and straightening out that alignment. So, that is what I know to this point and I am sorry I didn't get an update from Steve before he left Franden: Questions for Anna? Eastlake: None of these have gotten to a point of actually estimating costs, yet? Canning: No, this was just narrowing down the large set of alternatives to six. The next step is to take those six and to go down to three and then I think they do their evaluation, their full evaluation on the three. So, they will do some preliminary evaluations on these six. Franden: Thanks. Mike I forgot to get back to you on the intersections, the Mayor's questions, Brokaw: For the record I am Mike Brokaw the manager of administrative services and treasurer. I will just read you the list that the Commission reallocated some funds from after we had adopted our budget. The first one is Cloverdale and Fairview moving up the design from FY'08. The second one was Franklin and Maple Grove, it was moving up the design to coordinate with a federal aid project. Fifth Street and Front, that was construction. State Highway 69 and Victory, that's the design portion and State Highway 69 and Deer Flat, which is also moving up the design. Terry made a quick look at what some of the signals in the north Meridian area, where they were falling in his prioritization list and I believe Franklin and Linder is currently scheduled for construction in 2007. {f.' ' ( Meridian City Council J AChd Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 20 of 27 Ustick and Linder is scheduled for 2009 and Ustick and Meridian is still in prel1minary development or PD. So, that's what we did in reallocation process and thafs where some of the signals in the north Meridian area stand right now. Franden: Questions for Mike? None. Mike, thank you. De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. Franden: Mayor. De Weerd: I guess just to get our staffs together and start looking at what would you do on north Meridian? We are getting an awful lot of people out there on (inaudible) where stop intersections and again we have an open ending finding that these developments are supposed to be participating in some kind of transportation improvements and jf we continue to ignore it, well our window will close. Rountree: It will be built out. De Weerd: Exactly. This was our opportunity and our attempt to do something that maybe ACHD couldn't do, but we need to get our staffs together and see what we can. Franden: Any comments from staff at all as far as any work that is being done or planned to be with the City of Meridian staff? And the other question I have is on the north Meridian (inaudible --~-~-) what the status is of that. De Weerd: It's all hung up on transportation. Franden: How? De Weerd: On finding these solutions. On seeing if we can fill these findings. AI! the rest of the plan is done. We are waiting on the transportation. Franden: All the land use is done and all of those things; sewer, water and so on and so forth? De Weerd: Uh hmm. Franden: Mr. Mills, Mills: Mr. President, Madam Mayor and others this is an issue that we have - I think I have sat up here before and talked about this several times in previous joint meetings_ At the present time, the north Meridian area, the way it is being handled is through the CIP, that is the method that we have in place. We collect impact fees and they are supposed to pay for all improvements needed in the ( Meridian City Council! AChuCommission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 21 of 27 next 20 years. That plan will be updated to - it has to be updated in three years and probably again in 2006. At that point, if the continuing growth in north Meridian area occurs, I anticipate that it will probably kick more projects into the north Meridian area that will need to be funded in that next CIP. Until then, yes, there is some language that goes into the staff reports that leaves the development open to potential other fees as needed or required and the one that has been talked about has been an extraordinary impact fees, however, that shoe hasn't seemed to fit yet in the north Meridian area. In other words there is still a fair amount of capacity on those roads. Yes, there is some congestion that is building up at certain intersections. Not generally for an extended period of time. Traffic is probably better to address that than I am, but at this present time, the course we are on is through the C IP and the impact fee program to arbitrarily throw in any type of extraordinary fees, we would have to basically define an area, figure out what projects would need to go in that area and create an extraordinary an (inaudible) district that would assess extraordinary fees on top of our impact fees. However, I don't know that we could justify that at this time because we are saying that we have a CIP that covers that. Franden: Ms. Eastlake. Eastlake: I think that Bruce has said it, but I don't know if people are understanding it. When we started the north Meridian plan with this idea that it was going to be a real look at the un~fundable costs within the infrastructure in the north Meridian area and it was going to address the system, where development could pay for it's costs. What happened is that the north Meridian planned basically, in my opinion, said there is no need that the development will pay enough in the system that's in place to cover the cost of their development impacts and there isn't any need for another funding source. Then just either at the same time we are following right on it, our citizens committee to update our impact fees looked at the capital improvement process and said that based on the growth model that came from COMPASS and the traffic analysis of that growth model in the next 20 years, this (inaudible) impact fees are going to be adequate and the other sources that the other district has to match those are going to be added to do all the improvements. So, there is nothing left. The law won't let us say to somebody you have to pay us more money when we don't have anything - we don't have a north Meridian plan, we don't have a capital improvement plan, we have nothing that says the resources aren't adequate to pay for the needs. We can't be out there just charging money if we don't have something that shows there is a need that is not going to be funded. I don't know where we go with it. Franden: Commissioner Wynkoop. Wynkoop: The problem I am having with that is that's not what Washington Group said. Washington Group said there is going to be a serious funding deficit or either that or I misunderstood it, or maybe they are just wrong, but that's the ( Meridian City Council I AChLJ Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 22 of 27 dilemma I am having and the frustration is I thought we commissioned on Washington Group study and they said there was going to be this huge deficit out in the north Meridian area that impact fees won't cover. Mills: Mr. President and others, if I could address that I believe that what the Washington Group did was they said these are at full build out this is what's going to be required in the north Meridian area. I think the disconnect there was that they listed every project that was ever going to be needed at full build out in the north Meridian area. It did not say okay, but what's needed in the next 20 years? It just said regardless of time line, given the zoning land use of those parcels, this is what's going to be needed out there and they listed those projects and what the costs in that would be, but I do not believe that they meant that over a 20 year period. De Weerd: Mr. President. F randen: Mayor. De Weerd: And I believe (inaudible) those deficits we thought this finding could help bring a solution to and that it didn't have to be on the CIP, that it looked at the area as a whole and what can we do - what can the City ask for in our findings that maybe ACHD couldn't ask for and that's what we continue to struggle to try and find and again, you know, with the cautionary note that those opportunities diminish everyday, every building permit and we would just like to- if it's your staffs opinion there is absolutely nothing that we can do at that finding, then we will just close that loop, that finding and say okay I guess the intention was good. The city wanted to ask for something that, perhaps, you couldn't, but we just - we would like to find out a definitive answer. Is there something that we can be putting in that condition that we can ask for or not? Franden: Commissioner Eastlake. Eastlake: Me President, Madam Mayor. I think that the one thing that we are going to have a talk about this f think Wednesday - the one thing that I think our CIP is really having the tough time addressing is the fact that we have to decide in the CIP whether we are going to (inaudible---) a three lane road or five lane road. If we say we are going to build a three lane road, it'll come back that the demand is for maybe 10 years earlier and if we say we are going to build a five lane road, so that where we might need a three lane road in 2009, we probably don't need a five lane road until 2019 or something like that. The difficulty is if we put in three lane roads and we don't get the right of way for five, we can't then build five lane roads 10 years later because developments come along and so it seems to me that thafs a place where we might - where there might be something we can do here by saying ACHD is going to decide to use either a CIP three lane roads and that will move up the timeframe for construction of those improvements. But, at the same time, we might - maybe there is some way that ( Meridian City Council I AChtJ Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 23 of 27 we can say that because these roads have to go to five lanes in the next 10 years that the city could as a condition require that that extra (inaudible) figure or whatever it is be left undeveloped, not that we don't purchase it because we can't use impact fees to purchase it, I think, if it's only a three lane road and we don't do it for five to ten years, but maybe there is some way that we can figure out how to state the need as a three lane road, so that it gets into the CIP earlier, so that the construction costs do come here, the intersection costs and all that, but then we somehow say but for right away purposes we need to preserve five lanes in the development application. So, that 10 years later we can then come back and buy that extra 15 feet or whatever it is on each side. So, maybe that's what we ought to be talking about is some way to focus the CIP on the short term needs and the long term needs both and figure out how the city can then help us do the right of way preservation because right now we are leaving this - we are giving reports that say the applicant can do this or this or this, trying to get some system to make sure they don't build in that place and don't put their sidewalks someplace that we are going to tear the sidewalks out and maybe that's what we need to do. De Weerd: And, I think that those were the kind of things that were even discussed, even to the point of only having a continuous sidewalk on at least one side of that arterial and not having to do the curb, gutter and sidewalks and seeing how early we could get the intersections at least built and you know worrying about the rest of the arterial later and those were all ideas that were tossed around and - Eastlake: -and we haven't gotten any further for it. De Weerd: -- we have never gotten any further for it. Eastlake: And the other thing I remember us talking about was this idea of offering the developer, especially if they are doing a lot of the frontage. You know a third (inaudible) half a mile. Maybe, they would step up and build a whole mile on one side and agree to be reimbursed, you know, sometime later because it would sell their project. You know, I mean there's those kind of things too that we haven't really done too much of. Franden: Commissioner Wynkoop. Wynkoop: Tammy I appreciate you trying to force this issue because you are exactly right. We have frustration - you have been trying to help us. We keep putting this stuff in our north Meridian reports and it's getting us nowhere. It's either time to figure out what it means and do something specific or forget about it and just say north Meridian is like the rest of the county. So, how do we bring this to a head, Bruce and Anna? Franden: Commissioner Bivens. ( Meridian City Council! AGfoJ Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 24 of 27 Bivens: I guess the point that I wanted to point out and I certainly and totally agree with what has been said as far as being able to - if the developer is voluntarily willing to set aside that land, but if they are not, to me we are wide open for taking controversy, which we are (inaudible) of - so I think maybe we lack the tools to be able to accomplish what you say and you are right. This is a tough one because some way we need to set aside some land and that corridor preservation, I sat on the transportation committee there in the house and we had about three to four bills in there that we hadn't done nothing - never, yet that's the (inaudible---), De Weerd: Mr. Chairman. Franden: Madam Mayor. De Weerd: Just to bring this to a close is it's these kind of discussions that our staff are supposed to have and then to go to the development community and see if we could bring some solid solutions to the table and do something with that finding. But, you know there has to be some work done to even go to the development community (inaudible) and then we can do something with that finding or not, but again I don't want to see this go on too much longer this week do lose our ability to affect anything positive. Franden: Also, I saw Bruce and Anna over there conferring with each other. Do you have a plan? Canning: Yes sir, Mr. President, Madame Mayor and others. Despite my first flippant remark, I am sorry. I think there are a couple of ideas and I just talked to Bruce and I think if ACHD makes it clear what their eventual right of way needs will be, I think we can work with that with the developers and they are pretty understanding_ It gets frustrating to them when they hear what's in the CIP and planning staff is saying, but we know we are going to need more eventually and they are like well you are not the road people and so it's frustrating to them. So, I think if we have that information from ACHD that would help. Also, when we started re-Iooking at north Meridian area plan, it was my understanding from the development community that the land use issues were no longer a problem, but recently they have been harping on me on those, too, so some of those we started with those transportation issues associated with north Meridian area plan thinking that that was really the remaining issue, but there are some land use issues that are still outstanding apparently. So, I have committed to working going back to that and looking at those overall land use issues and the development community is very interested in that, so we can talk to them again aboLlt some of those things. The one that really seems the most difficult is the question about how can we get some of these intersection improvements done in advance whether the developers funding them, what kind of incentive can ACHD give them and I think that that's the one thing where we really need your help is (".. ( Meridian City Council! AChUCommission Special Joint Workshop Meeting .... October 4, 2004 Page 25 of 27 how can - what carrot can you throw out there to have them do? Because I think it does have to be a carrot. I think we are all - our hands are tied as far offsite improvements, so- Franden: Could we ask that your staff and our staff get together this month and then by the end of the month we have a report ~ if nothing else is just to grow more report on what progress has been made and what direction we are going and keep this on the burner and keep - what we could do is we'll ask that at least once every month that we have an updated report so we are moving in the -- EasUake: Maybe we ought to have another meeting with Meridian just on this issue. Bird: We need to because- Eastlake: Just schedule a special meeting - Franden: Okay. De Weerd: Let's throw Item 3 on there, too, since it's late. (Inaudible discussion) Franden: Is there anything else? The only thing I would just like to say in closing is that I really appreciated this meeting and it's really evident to me is the pressures that are put on both of us because of growth and what we are having to respond to and we are all doing our very best. I apologize if I got a little bit excited over the school issue and the access there. I guess it's just part of what we are all dealing with, but what we decide to do is to work as closely as we can with you and the city and do whatever we can to do what is best. De Weerd: And I agree, John, we want to know how we can make a difference with the traffic situation and some Meridian improvement online as quickly as possible and I know that there are some things that you can't answer and if there are things that we can, we certainly would like to bring that into our findings and be more help to your efforts and so that's all we area trying to do. Eastlake: Do you (inaudible--) the charge on Dr. Freilich, does it take into account any of this? I mean, is the kind of thing that he might begin an address or is that -- ? Franden: I think so. (Inaudible discussion) Franden: I see (inaudible) nodding his head. ( \ Meridian City Council / AChuCommission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 26 of 27 Eastlake: Because I think his expertise is so broad. De Weerd: I think we are all real vague on what's (inaudible---). Rountree: I think the long-range transportation plan should address what these (inaudible ----) look like, Eastlake: And it seems to me that maybe somewhere we can solve the pedestrian problem, too. Maybe if we can get five lane corridors preserved, while we are building three lane roads and we can put the sidewalks back at the edge of the five lane corridor or we can get the sidewalks in there even if we don't have the street improvements in there. We can get the intersections done. You know, I mean maybe there is a way to piece meal some of these projects in a way that cannot have to all be torn up. That's the problemy we are so stuck on - we don't want to build sidewalks and then tear them out. Bird: It's a money (inaudible--~----). Inaudible discussion. De Weerd: Well, we like the detach, so just make a detach and maybe they are not as - Franden: The detached at the full five-lane build out and everything. Eastlake: Except the problem is you don't own the property on the two sides of the developers. De Weerd: So, get your attorney on that. Levihn: Sorry, to interrupt, I was just going to give some good news to the rest of the commission that we received on Friday as part of our funding effort and positioning actions to get us in a position to be recognized on a broader scale than just locally. We submitted for a bicycle friendly community award to the League of American Bicyclists and on Friday, we received a confirmation smail that they were going to make an announcement today. We haven't seen it yet. A national award has been given to Ada County Highway District as a bronze winner of the bicycle friendly community award and they have got four different levels. They have got bronze, silver, gold and platinum. Nobody has a platinum, yet. There are two gold in the United States. That's Palo Alto and Portland. Then there is a rash of silver and a rash of bronzes. We are the only countywide district that has received the award, It's all been municipalities before. Although some other counties have applied and it's based, not just on lane miles Of connectivity, although that is a big part of it, but also on your policies, your procedures, your maintenance. For instance, our quarter inch special chip seals ('~....... t ..' Meridian City Council I AChO Commission Special Joint Workshop Meeting October 4, 2004 Page 27 of 27 for the bike lanes on Hill Road. Those kinds of considerations given to bicyclists and every two years they re-evaluate us to see if we stay the same, move up or worse case drop back. But, we wanted to let you know that that should be coming out. Thank you. Item 3. Discussion of Storm Water Retention Ponds - Maintenance and landscaping Issues City of Meridian/ACHD (Mills/Brown): tabled to another meeting Franden: Okay, anything else? We are adjourned. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 1:35 P,M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: If) ,21 I/) If- DATE APPROVED ATTESTED: ** TX CONFIRA...,iJDN REPORT ** c: AS OF OCT 04 '04 15:26 PAGE,01 CITY OF MERIDIAN 03 04 DATE TIME TO/FROM 10/04 15:21 ADA CTY DEVELMT 10/04 15:25 208 387 6393 MODE EC--S EC--S MIWSEC PGS 00'39" 002 00' 39" 002 CMDJ:I STATUS 008 OK 008 OK ~ u ,/'" Cm- OF - L/Vlen"vli<<Ji-)'iA 't, ~ lOAIIO f ?~" ./ '/.\ fJ.:U ." ~ . ..: ~"I".tl~II\t"" ~ I~n:;l: !18fl-{<. h{~k/~c.. ;0Jf?~ MAYOR Tammy de WeeI'd NOTICE OF SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP I MEETING CITY COUNCI(. McM8EHS William 1. M, NIU')' Keith mrd Charles M, Rountree Shaun W~(dJ~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL & ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS CITY DEPARTMENTS Fire S40 E. PrOlnklin Rllad 888-1234/ fa~ $95-0390 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridjan and the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District will Pa~'b; & Recreation U E. !luwer Sttee t 888-J579/ fax 598-5501 hold a Special Joint Workshop at the Ada County Highway District's Auditorium, 318 East 37th Street, Garden City, Idaho, on Monday, October 4,2004 at 12:00 pm noon. They will be discussing planning Plannil\g & Zoning (>60 E. Watertower Lam. !)uite 202 S84-;';5::l31 Fax 888-6354 and service issues and items concerning both agencies such as: Police 1401 n:. Watertuwer Lane 888-6(,78 {f~>.: B46-7366 - status f update reports on current and future projects in Meridian, - update on Meridian Transportation Management Plan, - discussion of storm water retention ponds - maintenance and landscaping issues, - other issues time permItting. Public WOl'ks 660 E, W"tertower Lal\f. Suite 200 S98-5S0U /l'a x 891'-9;';51 The public is welcome to attend. . Building 660 E, Watertower Lane Suite 150 387-2211/ fax. 887-129;' DATED this 1 st day of October, 2004. - S~wer (WWTI') 3<!Ol N. Ten Mile Koa~ SaS-21911 [ax 884-0744 . W~b::r 22:;5 N, W. 8th Su-eel $S8-5242/fax. 884-1159 Merielian City Council Special Joint Meeting with ACHD Commissioners - October 4. 2004 At! materials presented at public meetings shall become the property of the City of Meridian. Anyone deslrfng accommodation for diSabilities fafa/ed to documents and I or hearings, plesse contact the Administration of Ada County Highway District at 387-6100 at feast 48 hours prior to the public mooting. CITY HAl.L 33 EAST IDAHO ^VcNU~ MERIIJIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 Cin CWHK-!i\X 888.<1:.218 HUMM',1 RESOURtF.S-Fi\!\ ?,f\4.f\723 FINM'Cf. & LlTlI,lTl' HIl.I.INC-fi\X SB7-4813 MIII'on'S {)FI'IC~-!\\^ 884..8JI9 ** TX CONFIRMATION REPORT ** AS OF OCT 03 '04 20:50 PRGE.01 CITY OF MERIDIAN 81 02 83 84 85 05 87 88 89 18 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 28 21 22 DRTE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS 18/83 28: 12 3818150 EC--S 81' 81" 882 10/83 28: 13 PUBLIC WORKS EC--S 00'40" 002 18/03 20:14 12884664485 EC--S 88'48" 002 10/03 20: 15 8841159 EC--S 08' 39" 882 18/83 28: 17 2888848744 EC--S 08' 41" 002 18/03 28: 18 POLICE DEPT EC--S 00' 39" 802 10/03 20:19 8985581 EC--S 00'38" 002 10/03 20:20 LIBRARY EC--S 08'49" 002 18/03 20:21 92083776449 EC--S 00'39" 802 10/03 20: 22 3886924 EC--S 80' 39" 002 18/83 20:24 2888886854 EC--S 88'39" 802 10/03 2121: 25 288 895 0390 EC--S 00' 39" 082 18/83 28:27 ADA CTY DEIJELMT G3--S 88'35" 80121 18/83 28:28 ADA CTY DElJELMT EC--S 80'27" 088 10/03 28:29 ADA CTY DEIJELMT EC--S 80'26" 000 10/83 20: 30 ADA CTY DEIJELMT G3--S 00' 35" 000 10/83 28: 31 8885052 EC--S 80' 39" 082 10/1213 28:32 CHERRY LANE G3--S 81'16" 882 18/83 28: 34 IDAHO ATHLETIC C EC--S 08' 41" 882 18/83 20:35 ID PRESS TRIBUNE EC--S 88'41" 882 10/83 28: 37 2088886781 EC--S 8121' 41" 082 18/83 28: 50 ACHD DEV ----S 88' 8121" 888 THIS DOCUMENT IS STILL IN MEMORY CMD~ 008 888 088 808 088 81218 088 808 888 808 088 808 008 808 088 088 088 008 808 008 088 008 STATUS OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK INC INC INC INC OK OK OK OK OK BUSY ------------------------------~----~-------------------------------------------------------- " fJ! eft-~ h{ ~ hr /~ C.- ;t4;~~ ~p rCITYOF - L/VI ent;lierri ^ .~v( IDt\IIO MAYOR Tammy de Weerd NOTICE OF SPECIAL JOINT WORKSHOP I MEETING CITY COUNC1E. MEMBEJ~S William L, M. Nary Keith Bird Charles M, Rountree Snaun Wardle ::ITY DEPARTMENTS !~irc: HO E. Pnmklin Road l88-1234/ fax 895-0390 'arks & Recreation 1 E, Bower Street :88-3579/ fax 698-550'1 )lannin~ & Zonin2, MERIDIAN C1TY COUNCIL & ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Meridian and the Commissioners of the Ada County Highway District will hold a Special Joint Workshop at the Ada County Highway District's Auditorium} 318 East 37th Street, Garden City, Idaho, on Monday, October 4, 2004 at 12:00 om noon Thpv will hClo rlic......,"'...i....." ....I_...-;-~