Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 01-18 MAYOR Robert D. Corrie HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 · Fax 288-2501 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Ron Anderson Keith Bird Tammy deWeerd Cherie McCandless CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 · Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 · Fax 888-6854 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING 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 Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, January 18, 2000 at 6:30 PM. The Meridian City Council will discuss agenda items on the regular City Council meeting. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 14th day of January, 2000. : ..' . \\\:\\\"tt""'l// ~~.. . ...... ~6 (L , \" f .~t:" 1'1 -1 ,~'\:"'" 0 mcf(tO;t. IIJI" c;:/ .. ~ I I''''a:- .-dPOR.1l'~ ~~ '.o;.~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. - CfTY CLERK ~ . ___uU' .. ~A ,.. '~ v ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... - - - ~ - - - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ .., l'L.. cf.:: ,. .-~ "D ;: %"'0 lIsr 1 s~ · ~ ~~ "; .'f}() ~ ...."" .II 1 C ~ " '111", OUf~1~. \"", I. II \ \ \-" flii/HU n\\\ - MAYOR Robert D. Corrie HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Li ve LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 · Fax 288-2501 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Ron Anderson Keith Bird Tammy deWeerd Cherie NlcCandless CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO l\tIERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 · Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884~5533 · Fax 888-6854 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING 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 Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, January 18, 2000 at 6:30 PM. The Meridian City Council will discuss agenda items on the regular City Council meeting. The public is welcome to attend. fletlfe /()SI ~ ;JaUr~c IIol1ce -n~ ( ( \ ** TX CONFIRI'u, I ION REPORT ** AS OF JAN 18 '00 t.I::f:20 PAGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DRTE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMDt; STATUS 03 01/18 09:14 PUBLIC WORKS UF--S 00' 12" 001 196 OK 04 01/18 09:15 LEGAL DEPARTMENT EC--S 00'24" 001 196 OK 05 01/18 09:16 8841159 EC-S 00'21" 001 196 OK 06 01/18 09:16 2088840744 EC--S 00'21" 001 196 OK 07 01/18 09:17 8845077 EC--S 00'21" 001 196 OK 08 01/18 09:18 12088985501 EC--S 00' 30" 001 196 OK 09 01/18 09:19 LIBRARY EC--S 00'24" 001 196 OK 10 01/18 09:20 2088886854 EC-S 1210'21" 001 196 OK -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MAYOR Robert: D. Corrie HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place (0 Live CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO M:ERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 City Clerk Ot'tice Fax (208) 888.42 J S LEGAL DEPARTMENT (.~08) 288-2499 " F:1X .2RS-250 I CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Ron Anderson Keith Bird Tammy deWeerd Cherie McCandless PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 · F:.x 887.1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (20S) 884-5533 · Fax RR8.G8Sa. NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING 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 Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, January 18,2000 at 6:30 PM. The Meridian City Council will discuss agenda items on the regular City Council meeting. The public is welcome to attend. flltdfe fJpfl ~ fMtt'c fIol1ce -n~ l.. MA YOR Robert D. Corrie ( HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Li ve LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 288-2499 · Fax 288-2501 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Ron Anderson Keith Bird Tammy deWeerd Cherie McCandless CITY OF MERIDIAN 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 · Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 · Fax 888-6854 NOTICE OF PRE-COUNCIL MEETING 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 Avenue, Meridian, Idaho, on Tuesday, February 1, 2000 at 6:30 PM. The Meridian City Council will di.scuss agenda items, which are on the regular scheduled City Council meeting. The public is welcome to attend. DATED this 26th day of January, 2000. \ \ \ \ \ \ I 'f' II , III/ ,\\\ F M- 1I111 ,'\'- ~ 0 Epl':~ 1,,/ .....' :\' ., [;0.1 .1/ ./ c} oPPOR,q '1.z., /~~ .:: ~G rL'-. ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ , ~ - - ~ ~ .... '" ;?/~J-e /1P1.f In lu6bc.l/&fiUL -~s ( MERIDIAN CITY PRE-COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 18. 2000 The Pre-Council meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 6:40 p.m. on Tuesday, January 18,2000 by Mayor Robert Corrie. Members Present: Robert Conie, Tammy deWeerd, Cherie McCandless, Keith Bird, Ron Anderson. Others Present: Bill Gigray, Gary Smith, Kenny Bowers, Shari Stiles, Bill Gordon, Tom Kuntz, Will Berg. Corrie: Okay. I'll open the special session on Pre-Council meeting at 6:40 p.m., January 18, 2000. Council, your pleasure on the questions. Staff? Mr. Anderson. Item D. Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for annexation and zoning of 150.79 acres of land for R-4 zoning by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Item E. Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for preliminary plat for proposed Bear Creek Subdivision of 326 single-family dwelling lots by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Anderson: Bear Creek_ What do we do with that? That's on Consent Agenda, isn't it? Corrie: Good question. Mr. Smith. I guess you're up - I think you sent us a memo the 18th that we need to find out what you had in mind there and what procedures we need from Bill to - what we need to do, what we should do. Smith: Thank you, Mr~ Mayor and Council members. I was just wanting to get a couple of clarifications on the Findings of Fact_ I think I listed those on my memo_ It was a concern that I've got with some of the verbiage, the meanings of some of the YJOrds along with the statement that the Black Cat Trunk sewer fee was going to be $1500 per lot, and that has not been established absolutely yet_ That was an estimate at the time that the testimony was taken. I'd really rather see, hopefully, a different type of language that does not establish that fee to be $1500~ I'm not sure what the number is, but I'd rather have the flexibility at this point to make a final determination in the very near future. I think my other comments were mostly just my thoughts on some of the \^lOrds that Vv'9re used as to whether they were or this project was disturbing to others and whether or not it was going to cause excessive traffic. I believe it will. I believe that it is disturbing to others. I just vvondered if there were better words that could be used. I think this is kind of canned, shouldn't say canned, typical language with these for [' Meridian City Pre-Council Mee\h.~ January 181 2QCX) Page 2 Findings. I'm not sure that maybe Bill could comment. I think that was the crux of my comments, Mayor, Council members. Corrie: I think there is a couple places there, too, that acreage was YJrong. Smith: Oh, yes, sir. Correct. For some reason or another, I don't know where the 150 acres came from, but the legal description has 154 acres as it's described and as a part of the Findings. I would assume that perhaps maybe the - I talked to Bruce Freckleton and he thought that maybe the rights-of-way had been taken out of the annexation description to get to the 150 acres. But the annexation should include the rights-of-ways and should include all of the property in that legal description. Thank you. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Gary, I see in the deal that they've got approximately, the developer (inaudible) to pay approximately $1500. It doesn't say a flat $1500 in this one~ They also have changed it to the O'Mlers of Lot 1 have indicated their desire to donate to the public a park. Well, who is Lot 1? Who are the owners of Lot 1? That's what I mean. Yeah. They've taken - this is the thing that JoAnne sent back to Bill. Bill has sent on to us. Maybe you haven't seen it, Gary. I don't know. Smith: No, I haven't, Councilman Bird. Bird: Would you have any problem with it being approximately $1500? Smith: No, sir. I 'NOuldn't have any problem with the W'Ord approximately being added to it. Bird: Mr. Mayor. I don't know how the other Council members feel, but I think we definitely need to take this off of the Consent Agenda and if we want to put it towards the end or at the end of the other one, or if we have time, run into it, it would be fair to me, but I think there's some - looks like to me they're trying to change some stuff that we passed. If they want to do that, they have to start back through the process as I understand the process. Corrie: Some of the things, too, Mr~ Bird, I think they're trying to change the preliminary plat that we already approved. Bird: That's right. Corrie: According to Mr. Gigray's letter, I think that they also want the City to develop the park, park fees. Bird: Well, that's what I kind of take it here, too. I don't - not being a lawyer and the way these lawyers vvrite, it's hard for us laypeople to understand, but I kind of got that idea, too, that they might want us to fund that out of our Impact Fees~ ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meeh..~ January 18, 2CXX) Page 3 ( Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as I understand the procedure at this point, you have before you Findings which our office has prepared because you have closed the public hearing. You haven't taken any final action, at least according to my records, and I would defer to the City Clerk because he has the official records which means that these Findings have not yet been adopted, but you have closed the public hearing which means that you've closed off the receipt of any new evidence and testimony concerning facts relative to these two proposals. If you want to go ahead and deliberate and make a decision based on only the evidence that has been presented at the hearings other than argument that would be submitted, then you can proceed to make whatever decisions you feel the evidence would support. If you want to receive additional evidence on some of the issues that have been raised here regarding matters about why a requirement to dedicate the park is not advantageous to the developer because I believe of IRS regulations issues regarding the accredit against what I would assume are Impact Fees for the park for its dedication and development and some of these other matters, it seemed, at least to my knowledge, outside of the motion that was made by Council directing me to make the Findings. That's why I recommended in my memo to the Council that if you want to get into these matters that you probably should reschedule this for a public hearing and someone vvould need to open it back up for a public hearing and then give notice so that everyone else can appear and testify if they have a position on it. As far as the issues concerning the Findings relative to infrastructure issues, I had to in this particular one prepare Findings in light of what I felt was the motion made by the Council. We had to 'NOrk from the Planning and Zoning recommendations which that motion directly related to~ I believe in my memo to the Council specified those areas of the recommendations that I left out because I felt that they were contradictory because of the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission induded all of Public Works' Comments, some of which I think would gravitate to a denial of this project. You're the ones that make the Findings. As long as you feel the evidence produced at the hearing supports whatever Finding you end up voting for, then you can make whatever changes you want to. Or if you want to delve into these subjects in more particular traffic and other things that have been raised, then my advice would be open it back up to a public hearing and re- advertise it and re-address those issues at that time_ Corrie: Comments, Council? deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. To understand this a little bit more, if we keep it on the Consent Agenda and approve it as written with the changes that Gary has specified, because they don't change content, it's just corrections, correct? ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meeb,.~ January 18, 2QCX) Page 4 ( Gigray: In my view, some of the Findings with regards to traffic issues might pose other issue to the approval of this application which was the heart of the emotion that was made. I would need specific direction from you as to what you would be advising me to change the Findings so that they VtJere worded in the way that you wanted them worded and which ones. See, I can't just make these up. I have to go from the record that is made and from the motion that's made. That's what I try to do as best I can. So I need specific directions - you have, the Council has numerous times in the past made corrections in those Findings, and you just tell me in your motion what those corrections are so when we resubmit them to the Clerk, they include whatever corrections you've requested. deWeerd: So I guess the technical comments like the acreage and the per-lot sewer trunk line fee if changes to the wording - I guess what I'm asking is if we correct what could be corrected without re-opening it, they can appeal? Gigray: Judicial review. The test is whether there's going to be substantial evidence in the record to support the Finding. If there is, the Court will affirm it. deWeerd: So we probably should table this until next meeting so that we can look into those things? Look at the - Gigray: My advice is if you're going to receive more evidence, testimony and information other than just argument about what is in the record already, I think you need to re-open the public hearing, and, in fact, if you're going to hear argument about whether the Findings should say this or the other, I think you should give notice to all parties that you're going to entertain such motion so everybody has an opportunity to argue the record as they see it. That'd be like me representing a party in a lawsuit and the judge saying I'm going to hear final argument and I don't get invited. It's a problem. If we're dealing with technical issues relative to getting just the right acreage or something to that nature, I'm not too concerned about that as long as we can point the record and know exactly what it is because I'm just following the recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, or if we've made a typo, we can correct those things without any big problem. Or if you feel in your analysis of this that there's a Finding in there that is flat wrong and that you know the evidence supports another Finding, you can move that that be changed and we do it. But if you're going to get - You know, I think the line of demarcation is are 'N8 getting into new stuff that wasn't presented in the public hearing. deWeerd: Bill, when you do these, do you - when you do the Findings, do you also look at the recommendations back to P & Z or do you take that - Gigray: Depends on the motion that the Council members made. deWeerd: I don't know, Mr. Mayor, if this is the appropriate place to raise this, but as I sat on that side of your bench, I was always amazed that you guys never ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meet...~ January 18, 2CXJO Page 5 ( knew what P & Z meant in their recommendations. Now I see that you don't even get their minutes. So I guess now I understand why you didn't know where P & Z is coming from on their conditions because you don't read the transcripts. Is there a reason we don't have those? Gigray: I don't know the answer to that question~ That's part of the record~ The only thing that my recommendation to the Council is if you get this process so complicated that you have to or I have to look at 48 different things in order to draft Findings, there isn't enough time~ deWeerd: But when it came from P & Z and that's why even look for it, when it came from P & Z, did P & Z say that 'He vvould credit the impact fees to that park? I don't think we did, but I don't have the minutes to refer back to~ Gigray: There are specific recommendations that are Findings and Recommendations from Planning and Zoning and if the Council, and many times has made the motion, that they approve the project subject to the conditions and Findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission, if that's part of the motion, then I incorporate those verbatim in your Findings. Except in this case, there were some recommendations included in the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation that included all of the comments of the Public Works of which some I felt were contradictory to the motion of approval and I, in my memo to the Council, I specified what portion of those recommendations I had left out so that if you disagreed, you'd know what was not included in your proposed Findings that had been included in the Planning and Zoning Commission's Findings~ Now, the motion is an alternative motion. If, say, it's a motion to include the Recommendations of the staff excluding the Planning and Zoning Commission, then that means I have to go through the file and find out where all those are to put them together in Findings and Decision and Order~ That's always a more laborious process because that - that's helpful to me if you're saying just the recommendations of Public Works or you're saying the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Administrator, does that include the recommendations of the Ada County Highway District and everybody else, and that's why I'm thinking that this process can work a lot better if when those recommendations and Findings come out of Planning and Zoning Commission are issued through the Clerk's office, a letter goes with them as \Nell as a position statement so that the staff, the developer and affected property owners can fill out a position statement, and you know what their position is about those Planning and Zoning recommendations, so you know where the issues are. This needs to be changed, that needs to be changed, and it's got to be 'JVOrded this way or that way. deWeerd: Can this be an item for our workshop? Corrie: (inaudible) a lot of changes we're going to have a vvorkshop on all of them. ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meefbl!J January 18, 2OCX) Page 6 Gigray: See, at this point, as I understand the process, we get a recommendation or the Clerk's office gets recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission and its schedules along with the Mayor for the matter of public hearing before City Council so notice can be givena Then you have a public hearing here. Usually you close those public hearingsa Sometimes you continue thema Then I'm directed to prepare Findings and submit them to you by the very next meeting. I have to go off of my notes in order to make that time table because I cannot wait for the minutes of the meeting because there's usually quite a bit of transcript and it takes the Clerk's office a fair amount of time in order to simply physically type all of thata So in order for me to get all of that back. to you, I have to have that all put together. If I have a motion that's concise to the record, whatever it is, and if you have a record before you so you can make your concise motion, the potential for error or whatever is less. If we have broader scope situations with more and more conditions that could be vvorded different ways involving more and more information and chances for error or the chances for different interpretations of what a motion should mean are greater and greater. deWeerd: We just need to work on this process. I guess we don't need to go into detail about this on this one, but what do we want to do with this? Bird: Mra Mayor, I think we have to pull it and get it back open. They're proposing to change some substance to our motion. Most of the time, what I've seen, is 'He usually include the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning, conditions of the Planning and Zoninga This one we didn't a hundred percent, I don't believe. We had some in there, but they're changing too much stuff. I certainly wouldn't want to see it on a Consent Agenda. I think there's some stuff in here that they should have the opportunity to respond to because we're certainly not - I'm certainly not going to take what they're outlining and doing it without having another public hearing myself. I think you have to get it, Mra Clerk, if I'm right, to get it to an open meeting, we'd have to go to the 15th of February, wouldn't we, so that we could - be too quick. to go to the first, wouldn't it? So 'Ne'd have to pull those t'NO and table them until the 2/15 and have a public hearing, open them back up to a public hearinga I don't want - I feel that vve're playing with the substance of the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law on both items. What I thought was agreed upon. Then when 'He get a letter from the Council marking stuff out that we did not agree upon, I'm not going to pass something for that. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor, the other option is to approve them the way we felt, we voted, or you vateda Bird: That's righta Then as the attorney said, we can go to court deWeerd: Judicial review. ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meetll.~.. January 18, 2000 Page 7 Anderson: Mr~ Mayor, I guess the problem with that is we still have some things that aren't dear on the sewer issues in my mind that I think YJOuld be better off to table them_ deWeerd: And re-open it. Corrie: Re-open on the 15th of February. I agree with that, too. Bird: That's (inaudible) fair to both parties and get it right~ Because they misinterpreted something (inaudible) or we misinterpreted something, and I don't think that Bill did. I think we were pretty clear in our motion. Item C. Item D. Item E. Item F. Tabled 12/21/99: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for conditional use permit for 283-lot planned development for proposed Woodbridge Subdivision on 80.83 acres from R-T to R-4 by Woodbridge Community, LLC - south % of the NW %, section 17, T3N, R1 E: Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for annexation and zoning of 150.79 acres of land for R-4 zoning by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for preliminary plat for proposed Bear Creek Subdivision of 326 single-family dwelling lots by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: request for conditional use permit commercial subdivision mini- storage on Lot 2 of proposed Overland Mini Storage Subdivision By Overland Mini Storage, LLC - 1230 East Overland Road: Corrie: The other two Items C and F, the two new Council people, were you comfortable with (inaudible) you could certainly pull those off (inaudible). McCandless: Mr. Mayor, I have read all of them, and I don't know how comfortable I am with them, but I have read them all. Corrie: Mr. Berg. Berg: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, these two items were tabled because of the annexation process that needed to be completed before them. Today I did receive a signed Development Agreement from Woodbridge with the suggestion of review by the attorney before we put it on the agenda, but the process is we need to have this signed Development Agreement and then approve the (- Meridian City Pre-Council Meetl'itg January 18, 2(XX) Page 8 ( annexation ordinance, and then we can deal with the CUPs. That's what both of these items involve~ Bird: So we need to pull them to the 1st of February? (inaudible) Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I believe that, correct me, Mr~ Clerk, if I'm wrong, that the Development Agreement involved Snorting Bull, was one of the parties, and I have - there's been, as it often happens, and this is something that I would like to see get more clarified in the public hearings, these applications where they're anticipating selling the property somebody else. We prepare these Development Agreements and then they come back and say, well, we're selling this to so-and-so, so we've got to revise this and put another party in there, and it's not really been clear in the public record that's going to happen~ We've tried to facilitate that because simply unless the ow.ner was the central part of the condition which it has not been thus far, but in this particular instance, I have reviewed that Development Agreement~ I have reviewed the strike- throughs and they deal with who the party is and their address and those sorts of things~ It looks okay to me unless I'm looking at the wrong one. Will, you can correct me. I would think that would be ready to go and the Council could then move to approve the Mayor and Clerk's signature of that Development Agreement and that one could move forward at least to the best of my knowledge. Bird: How about the - Mr. Mayor, how about the Overland Mini Storage? Same thing on that? Do we have - Berg: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Bird, that's the same situation but I have not received the Development Agreement. I guess a point of clarification to the attorney, if I may, Mr. Mayor, if the Development Agreements can be approved tonight or do I need to put them on the next agenda? I wait to put them on the agenda until I have a signed Development Agreement, and some of these get lost in the process because of the back and forth of the little changes or the change of ownership. Just for clarification~ Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, you know, I think the process you've been following is fine. We could put the Development Agreements along with the Findings as an agenda item so when they come back in and if they've been signed by the developer, Council could go ahead and approve the City entering into those and maybe what should happen with Item F if it be continued to be tabled because we don't have a Development Agreement signed, possibly, the Clerk's office could notice this developer that this is being held and we need clarification as to what's going on here~ I can't remember now exactly why this one hasn't been signed~ Was this a change of ownership? Bird: So we need to table that? ( Meridian City Pre-Council MeethlY January 18. 2000 Page 9 Corrie: Table Items C and F~ Table those two~ Bird: He's saying we might be able to - Corrie: C is all right. Bird: Okay. Leave C on? Table D and E? Corrie: Right~ Bird: We're tabling D, E and F. We're tabling, but in the same motion we'll move E and F to re-open to a public hearing on February 15,2000. Corrie: Anything else on the Consent Agenda? Explanation - anything to talk about? Item H. Building Inspectors - Contract for Services: Anderson: Oh. The Building Inspector's Contracts? Corrie: Did you get copies of those? Anderson: Yes. Ask Gary a question? Corrie: Yes~ Anderson: Gary, on the Building Contract for Services, did you review those and is that the same contract, the same dollar amounts and everything as last year? Smith: Yes, sir. Everything's the same except for the date~ Anderson: All right~ Thank you~ Gigray: Mr~ Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Item 2. ORDINANCE NO. 853 Solid Waste Collection Services/Franchise: Item 7. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning of 10 acres from RT to LO for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View.. Approve- Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Item 8. Public Hearing: Request for conditional use permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an ancillary restaurant in L-Q { Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting January 18, 2000 Page 10 zone for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View: Item 9. Public Hearing: Annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres from C-2 and R-8 to C-G (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove: Item 10. Public Hearing: Conditional use permit to construct a single-tenant commercial building with a drive-thru window (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW comer of Fairview and Locust Grove: Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I just might note on the regular agenda, and I don't know if the Clerk's office has this, but with Ordinance - proposed Ordinance 853 on the Solid Waste Collection Services and Franchise, there should be an agreement also with 581 as a follow-up to that ordinance. I believe I have gotten a transmittal from their attorney, Mr. Freeman, that they have, in fact, signed that agreement, and I think we've got a copy of their corporate resolution. Thafs an item that the Council if it doesn't take action on tonight should come fairly soon and then I would encourage the Council to take a look at Items 7 and 8 and 9 and 10, and the Mayor as to 'Nhether or not 7 and 8 and 9 and 10 might be considered a motion to combine those companion applications for public hearing purposes only. That's something you've tended to do and can speed up the process subject to consent of the applicants and anybody appearing. Bird: Mr. Mayor, getting back to - I've got one question. On Gary's proposal concerning the latecomers fee, by approving that, is that the proposal, Gary, that you want to implement? We don't have any real facts and figures on there that I can see. You've got an approximate and something like that. Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, Councilman Bird, I just wanted to change - propose that change to the policy. There is not specific language that I wanted you to approve tonight, but I wanted to get your review and your comments concerning the format as far as how we return latecomer fees to those that extend sewer and water lines. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Gary, don't you believe that is something that we could take about 10, 15 minutes in the vvorkshop this month and discuss? Smith: Yes, sir. You bet. Sure could. Bird: So, would you be offended if we agree with you on this proposal but pull it from the Consent Agenda and bring it to the YJOrkshop? ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meeth,~ January 18. 2000 Page 11 ( Smith: No, not at all. We've got several latecomer agreements in the process of being finalized, determined, at cetera. I just want to get the language straight in those agreements so that we can return this fund and it will have to be taken care of in the agreement with that particular language or that specific language. Bird: Maybe City Clerk could get us a copy of each one of the Councilmen and the Mayor a copy of that latecomers fee, generic, I know they're all different, but the generic agreement to let us look at when 'Ne'ra doing that. Smith: I'll make you a copy of an example agreement that we presently have approved and under contract, so to speak, that's operational right now. Bird: Then we'll put that on the 28th workshop agenda for a short meeting. Smith: Okay. Corrie: That's fine~ Anticipating, you being the Council President) we need to sit down and discuss what we can put on the workshop. We might take a half a day on some of these things because there's a lot of ordinances coming up~ Bird: I wouldn't have a problem with that, Mayor~ Corrie: Okay. Anything else, any other questions that Council has? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Mr. Gigray, on this Ordinance No. 853, did you say to hold that - you didn't say that. I just wondered. I didn't think you had, just the agreemenfs coming in. Okay. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, all I'm saying is we have prepared an agreement, we have worked with S51 on the terms and conditions of that agreement. That has been approved all the way around. SSI has taken corporate action to enter into the agreement, and I'm just saying it is appropriate in my view if the Council wishes to consider it, that agreement could be approved following the passage of that Franchise Ordinance. Corrie: Thank you. Item 3. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning (R-T TO R-4) by Charles Crane -located at 3610 W. Ustick Road: Anderson: Mr~ Mayor, I had a question on Item 3 that public hearing and the request for annexation for Charles Crane. Refresh my memory ~ What was the deal on that one and what \NE}re we waiting on? ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting January 18, 2000 Page 12 Bird: The road~ Ada County Highway District (inaudible)~ Anderson: o kay_ Gigray: Mr~ Mayor, members of the Council and Councilman Anderson, as I remember, the reason that was continued or the reason it was re-opened for public hearing is that the way the motion had been made on the Findings and the proposed Development Agreement, it required some kind of dedication of roadway to the Ada County Highway District, and I think his contention was that he was not planning any immediate development, so therefore, that condition shouldn't be operable until development occurred, and I think there was some language problem there~ It was something that wasn't directly addressed, I don't think at the time at the other hearing by him, so it was recommended it be re- opened. Shari may have further background on that, but that's how I remember it. I think it centered on that one condition, primarily~ It was a condition requested by Ada County Highway Districta Bird: I believe that's all been straightened out~ Corrie: Mrs~ Stiles~ Stiles: Mr~ Mayor and Council, that is correct a There were some problems because of the zoning that he was given if he were to dedicate the additional right-at-way at this time would have put his lots below the minimum requirements of that zone. The way that Ada County Highway District comments read was that upon future development he would be required to meet those conditions, and the way the Findings were that he had to do that immediately. So that was why the public hearing is being re-openeda Item 5. Public Hearing: Request for vacation of 20-foot emergency access of Mirage Meadows Subdivision to a new access located at the end of Oakcrest Drive by Robert Higgins, et al - Block 1, Lots 16 and 17 of Mirage Meadows Subdivision and Lots 19 and 20 of Chateau Meadows east located at the end of Oakcrest Drive: Anderson: Just a question for Kenny on Item 5, the request for vacation of a 20- foot emergency access. The Mirage Meadows Subdivision. The way I read that, do they want to vacate that whole thing and that it would disappear, but yet, in your comments, it looks like you vvere talking about they maintain a gate and stuff like that and I was unclear - it sounded like it was going to go away entirely, but you were talking about a gate that 'NOuld be kept up. Bowers: Mayor Corrie, City Council, Councilman Anderson, there is a road right now that runs right by the Chevron Station. It used to be called Dixie Lane. They have to maintain that road because there is one house back there where a gentleman is living. They are going to use that road, put a gate and that's where ( Meridian City Pre-Council Meeting January 18, ~ Page 13 ( our emergency access will be used~ They will close down the one you're talking about completely be'tYleen the MIa houses - be'tYleen the four houses, excuse me. They will close that completely. We will still have where I believe it's Oakcrest comes in and meets the old Dixie Lane, we're going to have them put a gate there. We will still have access to the subdivision, Ron. Anderson: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Any further questions? Okay. We can - I'll entertain a motion to close the Pre-Council meeting and reconvene at 7:30 for the regular meeting. Bird: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:18 (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ATTEST: ~~P~/~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., TYCLERK MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 18,2000 @ 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL: --L TAMMY deWEERD --L RON ANDERSON --L CHERIE McCANDLESS --L KEITH BIRD --L MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE Election of City Council Officers: President and Vice President: Keith Bird - President, Ron Anderson - Vice President: Approve Consent Aaenda A. Approve minutes of January 4, 2000, Special Pre-Council meeting: Approve B. Approve minutes of January 4,2000, City Council meeting: Approve c. Tabled 12/21/99: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for conditional use permit for 283-lot planned development for proposed Woodbridge Subdivision on 80.83 acres from R-T to R-4 by Woodbridge Community, LLC - south % of the NW %, section 17, T3N, R1 E: Approve D. Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for annexation and zoning of 150.79 acres of land for R-4 zoning by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Notice for Public Hearing for 2/15/2000 E. Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for preliminary plat for proposed Bear Creek Subdivision of 326 single- family dwelling lots by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Notice for Public Hearing for 2/15/2000 F. Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: request for conditional use permit commercial subdivision mini-storage on Lot 2 of proposed Overland Mini Storage Subdivision By Overland Mini Storage, LLC -1230 East Overland Road: Tabled until February 1, 2000 G. Proposal by Gary Smith concerning Latecomer Fees: Put on February 25, 2000, workshop city Council Agenda - January 18, 2CXX) Page 1 (-- H. Building Inspectors - Contract for Services: Approve I. Streetlight Agreement with Brighton Corporation for Ashford Greens No~ 3: Approve REGULAR AGENDA 1. Reconsideration of Police Grant (hiring two officers): Approve 2. ORDINANCE NO. 853 Solid Waste Collection Services I Franchise: Approve Agreement - Resolution No. 285 3. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning (R-T TO R-4) by Charles Crane - located at 3610 W. Ustick Road: Approve - Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 4. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning of 20.05 acres from M-1 TO I-L by Albertson's, Inc. - east of Eagle Road, north of the railroad tracks and south of Settlers Canal: Approve - Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 5. Public Hearing: Request for vacation of 20-foot emergency access of Mirage Meadows Subdivision to a new access located at the end of Oakcrest Drive by Robert Higgins, et al - Block 1, Lots 16 and 17 of Mirage Meadows Subdivision and Lots 19 and 20 of Chateau Meadows east located at the end of Oakcrest Drive: Approve - Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 6. Public Hearing: Request for vacation of the easement lying adjacent to the lot line common to Lots 6 and 7, Block 3, Thunder Creek Subdivision by Thunder Creek Partnership, LLC - south of Cherry Lane, west of Ten Mile on Gray Cloud Way: Approve - Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 7. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning of 10 acres from RT to LO for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View Approve - Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 8. Public Hearing: Request for conditional use permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an ancillary restaurant in L-Q zone for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View Approve - Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law city Council Agenda - January 18, 2CX)() Page 2 (-- ( 9. Public Hearing: Annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres from C-2 and R-8 to C-G (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove: Continue Public Hearing to February 1, 2000 10. Public Hearing: Conditional use permit to construct a single-tenant commercial building with a drive-thru window (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove: Continue Public Hearing to February 1, 2000 11. Request for hookup to city water and sewer on properties located on Lots 13A and 138 in Van Hees Subdivision by Randy Ware - on Linder Road approximately"% mile south of Franklin Road: Allow hook-up providing application for annexation and zoning 12. Department Reports: A. City Treasurer - Janice Smith: 1. Treasurer's Report: B. Police Chief - Bill Gordon: 1. Local veterinarians selling dog licenses: Approve c. Mayor Robert Corrie: 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Appointment: Salley Norton - approve 2. Parks and Recreation Committee Appointment: Ed Fang - approve 3. COMPASS Representative from City Council: Tammy deWeerd with Ron Anderson as alternate - approve D. City Attorney - Bill Gigray: 1. Police Building Site Negotiations Report: Resolution #286 2. Development Agreements for Woodbridge Community, LLC - Resolutions #287 and #288 City Council Agenda - January 18, 2CXJO Page 3 ( E. City Engineer - Gary Smith: 1. Mike Luke request to connect to city sewer: Feedback on annexation City Council Agenda - January 18, 2000 Page 4 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 18,2000 @ 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL: X TAMMY deWEERD ~RON ANDERSON =x= CHERIE McCANDLESS =x=.KEITH BIRD X MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE , Election of City Council Officers: President and Vice President !Lei?-A...l3t),-d.. - /r.ff/de~t- ~ ~d.ur ~ -{/;u (Jr.e f/?Ud 4:?/rPve- Consent Aaenda A. B. Approve minutes of January 4, 2000, Special Pre-Council meeting: d-fl}nPtI~ Approve minutes of January 4, 2000, City Council meeting: ~I/.e-- Tabled 12/21/99: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for conditional use permit for 283-lot planned development for proposed Woodbridge Subdivision on 80.83 acres from R-T to R-4 by Woodbridge Community, LLC - south % of the NW %, section 17, T3N, R1E: a?pr-Pv~ Tabled 11412000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: request for annexation and zoning of 150.79 acres of land for R-4 zoning by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Ao-f;~ /rv //1/ th-t- Fe 6f-tL~:r I ~ Zo 0 Tablecl1/4/2000: Findings Of Fact And eonclusions Of Law: Request for preliminary plat for proposed Bear Creek Subdivision of 326 single- family dwelling lots by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: M{JC-e- /!rn- jJ/;( ~ f:e6I-uCVt~ I~ Zooo Tabled 1/412000: Findings Of Fact And ~onclusions Of Law: request for conditional use permit commercial subdivision mini-storage on Lot 2 of proposed Overland Mini Storage Subdivision By Overland Mini Storage, LLC - 1230 East Overland Road: ~ ~ftl R6r~~ 1/ 2-06>0 Proposal by Gary Smith concerning Latecomer Fees: ~ tP"- ~cn../<-S'1Lvp hv Fe6~rvr'1 251 2000 Building Inspectors - Contract for Services ar fro v-L- Streetlight Agreement with Brighton Corporation for Ashford Greens NO.3: V?PYOve, c. D. E. F. G. H. I. 1. 2. 3. 4. ( REGULAR AGENDA Reconsideration of Police Grant (hiring two officers): tlflrvvv 5. ORDINANCE NO. 853 Solid Waste Collection Services I Franchise: &f>f/ro(J~~ Approve a~~ /<.eS~~ p!. Zf3!7 Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning (R-T TO R-4) by Charles Crane - locafted at 361 0 W~ Ustick Road: ~pPAi -/ /-P e /L 6q. r:v6t~1. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning of 20.05 acres from M-1 TO I-L by Albertson's, Inc. - east of Eagle Road, north of the railroad tracks and south of Settlers Canal: ~ ~ p-tep/(/l.( ~I f' ( e I.JL Public Heanng: Request for vacation of 20-foot emergency access of Mirage Meadows Subdivision to a new access located at the end of Oakcrest Drive by Robert Higgins, et al - Block 1, Lots 16 and 17 of Mirage Meadows Subdivision and Lots 19 and 20 of Chateau Meadows east located at the end of Oakcrest Drive: a~t;j.. fo ~j?tvl..e IY~ I e/~ Public Heari{(g: Request for vacation of the easement lying adjacent to the lot line common to Lots 6 and 7, Block 3, Thunder Creek Subdivision by Thunder Creek Partnership, LLC - south of Cherry Lane, west of Ten Mile on .Gray Cloud Way: ~/ d' I a--;-~:; -Iv fhe-'ptiA< fi '/ of {! r:e Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning of 10 acres from RT to LO for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View~ . ~~to ~I!~ ;:/~ 1 (!!,t Public Hearing!" Request for conditional use permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an ancillary restaurant in L -0 zone for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View: ~ A, ~ a~1: fo ~fJtvt.e-rI'{ 'f e If!.. Public Hearing: Annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres from C-2 and R-8 to C-G (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove: CdYvj)n~ p;1I tVJ;vh 7 r.eh~ /lj:1jwty Public Hearing: Conditional use permit to construct a single-tenant commercial building with a drive-thru window (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove: Cv->-vfinlNL fJ I Ii tvrvh 2 Fe 6 ~ I f9 )h,-f?- Request for hookup to city water and sewer on properties located on Lots 13A and 138 in Van Hees Subdivision by Randy Ware - on Linder, Road approximately 'X mile south of Franklin Road: all&tJ MtJk-up (JYl9Vid/~ aj'JpelaJ7~ ftn-., tlfit,n.JLtuvh'c0 ~ d -zu-n-i h.j 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Department Reports: A. City Treasurer - Janice Smith: 1. Treasurer's Report: - ~povl.s B. Police Chief - Bill Gordon: 1. Local vets selling dog licenses: ~prc;V.e..- - 4.R4.&/v C. Mayor Robert Corrie: 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Appointment: Sa 1(~!1 Nof-fc;fv ~?yvvtZ-- 2. Parks and Recreation Committee Appointment: EcJ. FOILS a,jJjJrove,; 3. COMPASS Representative from City Council: --ra fy1~ ~ c;L * ~f:ruptp;t-~~ /tdn-II: D. City Attorney - Bill Gigray: 1. Police Building Site Negotiations Report: /Ct!fe&h0 #- Z 136 2.._ D//l-~S. WoodOn~r.e- I<RJ~1?-- #:2f37 t tdZ/3B E. City Engineer - Gary Smith: 1. Mike Luke request to connect to city sewer: .f'ee-d 6pU/~ ""-. Cl trl PUJC dr .~ ( ( ~~ ~m (J)m l'T1-t 13- :EZ ~G) ~ ~ ~ l'T1f -c c: '-....... """"'--. ~ OJ w ~ r- ~, '-\) ~ -0 ." ~ ~ ~ 0_ \ () ~~ ~ ~ '\ ~ V\. '" )>0 !\ ~." - I} ~t Z G)3: ~ cnm -..() ~ 'fl -;0 ~ .......... 0 G)_ ~ C!'\.. <: ZC ~ ~ rT1 ~ I _ z)> ~ c:: cnZ ~ c ~ ~ ~ )> J: >< ~ :;-. ~ \)-1 m ~ ::om m ~ ~- 0 -I c-.. rn () --i ~ c...... l> :z Cl <XI trJ ~ r"'.;) L~ 0 -: ~ o ;;: C) ~ " 1:J"~ c=t '- ~ ~ -o:b d j ~ V) o~ (" f\ ~~ , t:J ~ ~ ~, -c c: to r- nO - ffi~ ~o -." Z G)3: cnm -;0 G)_ ~c -- z)> cnZ :J: m m -I ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 18.2000 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:34 p.m. on January 18, 2000, by Mayor Robert D. Corrie. Members Present: Bob Corrie, Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Ta,mmy deWeerd, Cherie McCandless. Others Present: Shari Stiles, Gary Smith, Bill Gordon, Bill Gigray, Tom Kuntz, Kenny Bowers, Bill Nichols. Corrie: I'll open the City Council meeting for January 18, 2000, at 7:34 p.m. At this time, I will ask the City Clerk to give us a roll-call please. Okay. Before we have the election of City Council officers, President and Vice President, I'd like to welcome everyone here this evening, and a special welcome to two of the Star City Council members here tonight here to observe and see how we are doing here in Meridian. If I - Gail Glasgow and then Dennis Stegenga - okay. Election of City Council Officers: President and Vice President: Corrie: The first Item on the agenda is the election of City Council officers, President and Vice President. At this time, I'll entertain a motion from the Council for an office of Council President. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would like to nominate Keith Bird for the position of Council President. deWeerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion's made and seconded to nominate Keith Bird as Council President. Any other nominations? Okay. I'll entertain a motion that nominations cease. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Ms. deWeerd. deWeerd: Perhaps we should ask him if he would like that position. Bird: I'll take it. Corrie: Okay. (" " Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 2 Anderson: I would make a motion that nominations for Council President close. deWeerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded that the nominations for Council President close. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. The motion is before the Council is the Council President is Mr. Keith Bird. Should we have a roll-call vote on this to see if we have a unanimous decision, Keith? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Congratulations, Keith. You are now the President of the Meridian City Council. Now we put you to work. Okay. I'll entertain a motion now for Vice President. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: I'd like to nominate Mr. Ron Anderson. Bird: I would second it. Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded to nominate Ron Anderson as the Vice President. Any other nominations? Hearing none - Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we close the nominations for Vice President of City Council. deWeerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to end the motions for Vice President of City Council. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: All ayes, motion's carried. Motion for the Council is that Ron Anderson be elected Vice President of City Council. Discussion? I have one. You want it? ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 3 Anderson: He doesn't have to do anything, does he? Corrie: You'll be surprised what you have to do. Okay. Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Ron Anderson, congratulations. You are now the Vice President of the Council. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: You want us to do the assignment at the end of the meeting? Corrie: You can do it whenever you want. Bird: I can do it right now if you want. Corrie: Okay. That'd be fine. It'd be in order. Bird: Okay. If this is okay with the other Councilmen, the departments - you're going to get two. We've got enough departments we need to have two. Police is Cherie, Fire is Ron, Parks and Recreation is Tammy, I'll take Public Works, Planning and Zoning is Tammy, Human Resources is Ron, City Clerk is Cherie, MUSS and Treasurer I'll take. Is that fair with everybody? Anybody have any problems with those? deWeerd: What's MUSS? Bird: Municipal Utility Billing System. Any objections to any of those? No? deWeerd: I have none. Bird: That's all, Mayor. Thank you. deWeerd: Do you need a motion to accept those? Corrie: No. Hearing there was no objections, we're all set. Item A. Approve minutes of January 4, 2000, Special Pre-Council meeting: Item B. Approve minutes of January 4, 2000, City Council meeting: Meridian City Council January 1812000 Page 4 Item C. Item D. Item E. Item F. Item G. Item H. Item I. ( Tabled 12/21/99: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for conditional use permit for 283-lot planned development for proposed Woodbridge Subdivision on 80.83 acres from R- T to R-4 by Woodbridge Community, LLC - south ~ of the NW %, section 17, T3N, R1E: Tabled 1/4/2000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for annexation and zoning of 150.79 acres of land for R-4 zoning by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland Tabled 1/4/2000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: Request for preliminary plat for proposed Bear Creek Subdivision of 326 single-family dwelling lots by Bear Creek, LLC - east of Stoddard Road and south of Overland: Tabled 1/4/2000: Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law: request for conditional use permit commercial subdivision mini- storage on Lot 2 of proposed Overland Mini Storage Subdivision By Overland Mini Storage, LLC - 1230 East Overland Road: Proposal by Gary Smith concerning Latecomer Fees: Building Inspectors - Contract for Services: Streetlight Agreement with Brighton Corporation for Ashford Greens No.3: Corrie: Okay. Council, we have the Consent Agenda, Items A, 8, C, D, E, F, G, H and I in front of you. What is the pleasure of the Council on these Items? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: On the Consent Agenda, I would move that we approve Items A, B, C, H and I; that we pull D and E and send back to open a public hearing on 2/15/2000 and we table Item F. Item G will be coming before us on the 28th in our workshop. Anderson: I'll second that. Corrie: Okay. Motion's made and seconded to approve Item A, Band C, Hand I; to have Item D and E to be placed - re-opened for a public hearing on February 15, 2000; and Item G will go onto the workshop on the 28th of this ( \ Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 5 month, and Mr. Bird, did you want F to be tabled to the next meeting or just tabled for the night? Bird: Tabled until February 1st, I believe we - Corrie: To February 1st. Bird: Uh-huh. I'm sorry. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. Council, we have a possibility - if Item No. 7 and 8 would be opened to the public hearing, open those both up as a public hearing to hear the annexation and zoning and the conditional use permit. Is there anyone that's here for the Magic View Office Complex have any problem with that? Just a little timing as far as opening it up together. Just open them together. And Item No. g and 10, the same thing; open them both up for public hearing at the same time. They'll be handled differently. Council, does that meet with your approval? McCandless: Yes. Bird: Yes. Item 1. Reconsideration of Police Grant (hiring two officers): Corrie: Okay. Item No. 1 on our Regular Agenda is reconsideration of the police grant, hiring two officers. Chief Gordon. Gordon: Mr. Mayor, Council members, what I've handed out was a reproduction of what I handed out the last time I brought this issue before you. One exception is on the front there. The closing date at that time was December 13th. I have been able to obtain an extension to January 27th on this grant. Here again, I bring this back because I think it's extremely important because of the growth of the City that we accept this grant and put these two officers on the streets as soon as we can get them out there. The costs to the citizens of Meridian is half of what it's going to be over a three-year period, and even if we don't use them or you don't think we need them this year, if we hire them next year, we can't use this grant. This grant is a continuing grant. We've already hired eight officers on the grant. I don't know how long they're going to continue funding it. It was just re-funded again for next year, so I can re-apply at that time for more officers, manpower. The need is there. I've given you in the facts sheet, some stats. I was just sitting over here waiting for my return in the front here, and just an example of what has happened since we started keeping statistics, on Page 7 of ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 6 8, 1992 we responded or had calls for service 16,416 with 10 police officers which is 1641 calls for service per officer per year. In 1999, the calls for service is 79,924. We responded to 1949 calls per officer per year. That's an increase of 300 calls per officer. The crime rate stays low because of the work of the people that we have on the streets. They're responding to more calls now than they did in 1992. I don't look for that to go down. The stats on the previous page show an estimated population of - the year 2000 I think it was estimated we were going to be at 28,000 population. The signs outside of town say 36,000, and they're short. This trend is not going to stop. The growth, and I know all of you have seen that growth, just continues to go. It's going in all directions. I stress, and I can't stress enough, the seriousness of the situation, and I feel that the longer we wait, the farther behind we're going to get, and the harder it's going to get to get back up to a level playing field. The officer ratio, I've given you several different estimations for different publications. They show a population ratios presently, we're drifting on Page 4, we stayed low but evenly low up until '98, and then we started separating. We're going to get lower and lower as the population continues to increase. The cost. It's 50 percent - it's 50 percent of an officer for a three-year period. That starts out 75 percent of wages and benefits. The second year is 50 percent of wages and benefits. The final year is 25 percent of wages and benefits. That totals $134,372 that we're going to be able to save by taking advantage of the officers on this grant. Here again, I can't stress the seriousness of it. If we do not accept this grant, we will be removed from this program, and this particular program is the one dealing with officers. Here again, I have no idea how long it's going to continue. We've been on this program for the last four years, five years. This year, again, we were the only department in the state of Idaho to receive this grant, and, here again, it's because of our growth. They see the growth. The Y2K, they had Boise on national television touting the fastest growing community in the United States. Well, we're not that far away from Boise. What happens in Boise, we're going to have to tolerate also. Once again, I would ask that you reconsider this program and hopefully accept it. I would stand for questions. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Bill, you stated earlier in your presentation that you could apply for this grant again next year; is that - if we don't use it, you can't apply for it? Gordon: That's correct It's a continuing program, and the COPS program, I think five years ago, we had to give them an estimation of what we were going to need each year in the future and then we had to re-apply for each one. The program ended last year, but it was re-funded again, and that's why I picked up these two officers here. I just received word that it's been re-funded again for next year for the year 2000. I can re-apply as long as we take this grant here because we're still in the program. The departments in Idaho that did not receive Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 7 ( this grant this year are still in the program. If we refuse the grant, we'll be removed from the program. Anderson: I thought in our earlier meeting back in June that you had indicated to us that there would be no penalty, that when you wanted to apply for this grant, and we told you to go ahead and do that, that you could apply for it and that if we ended up not using it, then we wouldn't be penalized. I thought you had told us that we wouldn't be. Gordon: I don't recall that. My recollection was - my understanding was that if we did not accept this grant, we would not be allowed to apply for any federal grant within a three-year period. Then I found out that this only pertains to this particular grant. If we don't accept this, we're removed from that COPS program. There are other grants. Anderson: There are some other grants that would help with manpower? Gordon: No, sir. Not to my knowledge. That doesn't mean that they're not out there. Most of the grants right now are equipment grants. We just got another $3,000 on an equipment grant. We'll get that next week. Anderson: You came to the City in, what, '89? Gordon: Yes, sir. Anderson: And how many officers did we have then? Gordon: That was 10. Anderson: And how many do we have now? Gordon: Forty-one. Anderson: Was that total personnel or - Gordon: That's sworn officers. We have ten civilian staff. Anderson: So we have 51 employees? Gordon: Yes, sir. Anderson: How many total employees did we have when you came here? Gordon: Eleven counting me. Anderson: Is the WRICOPS assessment or study, has that been completed yet? ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 8 Gordon: No, sir. It is not. I've called and they've assured me that it'll be done at the end of January. I've asked Mike Baccar (sic) with the Department of Law Enforcement, Post Academy, to call. He did and he was also assured that it'll be done the end of January. We were promised the end of December. I realize that. We were promised the end of November and then the end of December, and now it's the end of January. Anderson: Out of the 51 employees, how many of them are patrol officers? Gordon: Twenty-eight. Anderson: Would these additional two employees, would they then make 30 on the street or would there be two that get re-assigned or .promoted? Gordon: No. The plan is they would go onto the street patrol answering calls where the need is right now. Anderson: And do we have enough equipment, cars and stuff like that, to handle the additional personnel? Gordon: We don't have the equipment, and to handle the officers, we have right now, but we'll make do. We're running cars 26, 27 hours by doubling some of the shifts up. Friday and Saturday nights are our busiest shifts. The need for the personnel would far exceed the need for the equipment right now. We're short on equipment, also, but I'm looking at another grant for that. Anderson: What kind of items are included in equipment? Gordon: Cars and just the equipment needed for each particular police officer, paperwork, tapes, tape recorders, staff to type the reports, files, the ratio of staff personnel or officer personnel, civilian personnel is also a ratio for the sworn officers. I haven't even gone into that area yet. We're extremely low in that area also. There aren't any grants for that. Anderson: You had indicated to us in the past that you're kind of bursting at the seams down there in your present facility and, in fact, we've added a portable building next to the Police Station, and we're in the process of trying to purchase some land for a new building. Will these two additional officers compound that problem even more? I mean, do we have more people taking up that space down there? Gordon: Yes, sir, it does. But if we don't hire personnel that's needed on the street because we don't have the space and the building, then when we get the new building, we're going to have a lot of space and no officers. The workload will be such at that time that they won't be able to enjoy the new building, and ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 9 they'll be out on the road. Not meaning to be funny, but I can take two officers and keep them on the street if we don't have room for them in the building easier than I can take the calls. We're already starting to back up calls. There for a long time we were able to stay on top of all of our calls. That is changing. We recently had to restructure our call-out - our calls for service by taking priorities. Calls that we were taking before we're no longer taking because we don't have the manpower. One of them was private property accidents, the other one is bad checks under $500. -We used to take those. We no longer take them because we don't have the personnel. This happens in - we're not the only one's that have done this. Boise's had to decide what calls they're going to take for service and which ones they just don't have the manpower to take. It comes with growth, and it's just a fact of life. I grudgingly hang onto as much service as we can provide because I still think we're still a small town, and I think we should provide that service, but we did give it up recently in those two areas. Anderson: My last question is, is there a set number of patrol officers that the department forecasts or determines that they need? I mean, the Council's intent could be to hire two new individuals to go on patrol, but is there anything that keeps them there? If you decide that you wanted to reassign eight of these people and put them in detectives or school resource officers, I mean, what keeps X-number of officers on the street? Is that strictly a management decision? Gordon: Yes, sir. With the increase in the school programs, the schools themselves, we're putting a new elementary school over here on Eagle, the school resource program, before we really got into that, the total crime for one year was 80 percent juvenile, 20 percent adult crimes. We got very active on our school resource program, and I took a patrol officer, put him into a school, each school has got a school resource officer at this time, we've lowered that crime rate back where it should be. Thirty percent of our crime now is juvenile related, and seventy percent is adult rated. Not that we've had the increase in the adult, but we've lowered the juvenile crime which automatically raises the adult crimes. There's no more crimes, but the ratios have dropped. The PAL program, I have an officer that's assigned to the PAL program which is a youth activity program which is designed to be proactive and deal with kids at a level prior to them growing up and becoming criminals. The other programs that we're looking at right now is the Boys' and Girls' Club. To do exactly the same thing that would require an officer. By using officers on other programs, I get away from that hook-them-and-book-them attitude, and cops just take people to jails because there's no more room in the jails. We look at other areas to eliminate crime. If we can catch them at a younger age, it's - statistics have proven that we don't end up with adult criminals. So by utilization of manpower, when you say patrol, we gauge the calls for service in the patrol area versus the proactive portion of law enforcement. I can tell you how many crimes there are, but I can't tell you how many crimes we prevent by having school resource officers. We have neighborhood watch programs. I can't tell you how many that deters. The ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 10 programs themselves are crime prevention, and you can't put a number on those. As the population grows, the actual numbers of crimes also grows. Without these programs, I would say the numbers that I just gave you would probably be about double. Anderson: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions? McCandless: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: Chief, if we did not add anymore new officers, we would find ourselves in a reactive position rather than in a proactive; would we not? Gordon: Mr. Mayor, Councilman McCandless, that's correct. As the population grows, I would be forced into strictly a reactive mode. We would have to respond to the calls for service faster than what we're already doing. McCandless: Do you think that the crime rate that's raising all the time in Canyon County and the problems that they're having in Boise are going to stop at our borders as we continue to grow? Gordon: They haven't so far. They're all around us. Our officers are dealing with the same people that Boise's dealing with; although I think they live in Meridian and go somewhere else to cause all the problems, but they're still here. McCandless: So we need to be - at least have a proactive attitude where our city is concerned and our safety, wouldn't you say? Gordon: I can give you and the taxpayers more for their money by being proactive, yes. If we're reactive, then we're taking people to jail and that increases taxes because you're going to need jails to keep them. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor, I just have a couple comments and questions. I did a little bit of background on why it didn't pass last month, and I do understand that there is a no-hire policy in the City and that the City Council really needs to stand by that policy. In adding personnel, it - we have growth throughout the whole city. All of our departments are experiencing it; however, I do believe that our safety and how safe our public feels should be a priority. I know that you mentioned youth programs. Can one of these positions be dedicated to your explorers, PAL and the possibility of a Boys' and Girls' Club if you were to get these positions? Gordon: One full-time position? Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 11 deWeerd: Yes. Gordon: As you know now, those programs are split up. I personally am handling the explorer program. Officer Ellis is handling the other programs, and Officer Chopko is handling the PAL program. I would think if we put it on one particular officer, we wouldn't get the quality that we're getting right now. Here again, you'd be taking a police officer and all he would do would be social work. Police officers are of a nature where they still need a little bit of police work (inaudible). I get more work out of them that way. deWeerd: But there are a lot of possibilities in expanding PAL into non- traditional, non-athletic events. I know there's been some concern that the police haven't always been able to be on-hand and be visible. Really, that is the advantage of PAL is really giving them the exposure to the police and giving them a positive role model and positive experience. So would there be more time that could be dedicated to those activities? Gordon: I can't answer that one. I can tell you that would be one of the goals would be to get more time in some of the programs that we already have. We have stopped accepting or starting any new programs with the exception of last Friday which was kind of a surprise to me on the Boys' and Girls' Club activity, but we have not accepted any new programs. Here again, the safety of the Meridian citizens would come first, and then what's left would go into the programs. I can't answer that positively yes. If we were looking at one person full-time, I think I would have to restructure our hiring program, and I would advertise for somebody non-commissioned officer, say, a civilian position who would be schooled in that area dealing strictly with youth recreation and activities. I think we could do far better that way. deWeerd: And would these positions be dedicated to the community policing philosophy? Gordon: Definitely. The Department is committed to that. deWeerd: When would they need to be hired, and what would be the effective date of this grant? Gordon: The effective date would be as soon as I could get them hired. They didn't give me a drop-dead date on the actual drawing of the money, just the signed documents stating that we were going to utilize the grant. We have fliers out right now to establish an eligibility list; that closes the end of January, we could be testing the middle of February and hiring probably the middle of March by the time we finished all of our background checks. deWeerd: So half way into your budget year? ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 12 Gordon: Yes. deWeerd: Then would it be good for a three-year period, so you're going - okay. Gordon: Yes. We don't lose the grant time. It's a total three-year grant. It would just extend it out. deWeerd: Can you go for one rather than both and still qualify for future grants? Gordon: I don't know. We didn't put in for one. I have no idea. deWeerd: I know this is a question that I asked last month. Gordon: I don't recall if you did, and I didn't get you the information, then I'm at fault there. I don't recall that. deWeerd: Do you have in your budget the training costs for these two positions? Gordon: The first year, the six months, no. They would be state-certified officers so they wouldn't have to go to the Police Academy, and it's free anyway. But, no, I don't. deWeerd: So would you be coming in and asking for additional monies, or do you have the flexibility in your budget to accommodate that? Gordon: The money that I would need would be the 25 percent match on wages and benefits which totals $22,000 - a little over $22,000. The other money would just be taken from within my budget, and, no, there isn't any extras, but there is flexible areas. We would do without some areas. deWeerd: Okay. I have no further questions. Corrie: Anyone else? Mr. Bird? Bird: No sense in repeating myself. McCandless: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: The community policing program would not only benefit the adult citizens of Meridian but would also benefit the kids of Meridian; am I correct? Gordon: That's correct. ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 13 McCandless: You'd have the officers out on the streets more, and they would interact with the kids as well as other people? Gordon: That is correct. McCandless: Okay. No further questions. Corrie: Hearing no further questions, I will entertain a motion as far as the reconsideration of the police grant as presented. McCandless: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. McCandless. McCandless: I move that we reconsider the grant to hire two new police officers. deWeerd: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded that we reconsider the - doing the police grant for the two new officers. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Just a few comments. Can't argue with Bill. He did a very good job of articulating with the needs of the Police Department. I would like to commend the Meridian Police Department. I think you guys are well-respected in the community and do a great job. The reality of the situation on this is this, though. The fiscal responsibility part of this falls on the City Council, and as Councilman deWeerd testified, it's just not the Police Department that is under pressure to keep up with the growth. It's Parks, it's Fire, it's everybody in the City. Looking at our budget this year, between the Police and the Fire Departments alone, 72 percent of the City's budget is going to those which is a fairly large investment that I think the City's putting forward towards public safety in this community. The reality is we took almost two million dollars out of our fund balance to help fund some infrastructure for the police and for the fire, and if we get too far out of balance where manpower costs, labor costs are on-going costs once we hire these people, then that cost is there every year. We have a tremendous need to expand facilities from police stations to fire stations to park facilities. If we spend all of our resources on manpower and on labor costs, then we simply would not be able to build the infrastructure to house those people. It's going to take a balancing of the resources to be able to do this. We've already run into some sizeable increases in what we're looking in land costs and some associated infrastructure with that, and I'm sure that we're not done with all of those costs. We have not yet seen the results of the WRICOPS study which I was very ( Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 14 interested in and would like to see their assessment on the police department and what some of their recommendations would be. I think we're four months into this budget year. To be honest with you, there is no fluff in the budget. I don't know where the extra money would come from to fund these two extra positions even at 25 percent funding, plus the additional costs for vehicles and equipment as you related to us. I guess having made those comments, I guess caution the Council that we have a fiscal responsibility also to our constituents out there, and I think that the reality is I think we have a great police department and Meridian is really struggling with growth right now. We would love to be able to add manpower, we'd love to be able to add it in all departments, but we have to balance that with what we can afford to do. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: I can understand where Councilman Anderson is coming from, however, I think safety has to come above all else, and I don't think we're setting a precedence by accepting these grants. I was under the understanding that we do have flexibility in our budget to accept this grant. If not, I'd like to know different. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: If he has any flexibilities within his own budget that he's got, we do not have any flexibility within the overall city one. Like Ron said, we've taken two million dollars out of our fund to fund some capital improvements so that we could give the raises and the equipment on the deal. I, too, believe that we've got a very fine police force. We had agreed last summer that we would wait and see what WRICOPS said before this was brought before us. Evidently, we didn't want to wait until WRICOPS got out assessment out. I think people are going to find out that WRICOPS is going to show that we are very well in safety. We're not a Garden City, we're not a Boise. Our 1.1 officer, I think, is fine for this city. Now, if we were Garden City or something, you'd want more, or Boise, Nampa, Caldwell, wherever. I think our police force does a very fine job. I, too, am like Ron. We - to meet the budget, get some infrastructure built, we have a very, very tight budget. We would have not made the budget if we hadn't taken in the two million dollars out of the slush fund. So even if I felt safe - that we need for safety of citizens - (inaudible) needed more officers, I wouldn't care whether it was a grant or not. I'd vote for it. I do not believe that we do. I believe WRICOPS will show that we don't. That's all I've got to say. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. ( Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 15 Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: For Councilman deWeerd, we don't have time to get into it tonight, but if you wanted .to table this motion, I'd be glad to go over the budget numbers with you and show you where we're at on those. Maybe we could get some better costs (inaudible) something we can afford. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Is this something that we can do at our workshop? Bird: We can - he's got to have it by the 27th according to what he just said. deWeerd: And when's our workshop? Bird: Well, you seem to be able to switch (inaudible). deWeerd: Our workshop is the 25th. Bird: It's the 28th. Corrie: It's the 28th. January the 25th. But you'd have to have a special meeting. Bird: You can't do it? Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Just a minute. Is Janice here? Would you have her come in? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: In fact, we had to go back into the Police Department and give them more money because we had screwed up on salary as it was, if you remember right, so they - we did have to give - because we had (inaudible) implementation of a nice program didn't quite work out like we thought it would, so we had taken that. Corrie: Janice, they're talking about - (inaudible) budget is concerned whether we have enough in a contingency fund of what's left of what we've done with the budget while we approved of. How much - is there any slack here? Smith: Yes, there is. I don't have the - right in front of me what was in the paper. We have about 70Q-some thousand not accounted - not designated. It was just general. When you did the report, you allocated so much for Police, so ( j Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 16 much for Parks, so much for Fire and the rest into general. You went into two million of the Capital Improvement Fund, but we're not going to be using all that two million into the Capital Improvement Fund, so there's like 700-some thousand that we won't either hit; you wouldn't have to use all that money from the fund balance. You took the two million out of the fund balance. The option is not to use all that two million or to allocate it. At the budget workshop, (inaudible) said no new employees, so that really downed everybody's expenditure report in the general fund. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I had a question for Janice, then. When we were at that workshop, it was down to $25,000. Where has this money magically come from now? Smith: Well, if you can give me a second, I can just bring it up on the screen. I've given a lot of the printouts to the Mayor and I've gone over it quite a bit. I think you have received a summary after the budget was in there, and you can see on your reports, expenditure reports, get a summary of those. There's - I can print you out one. It'd be the last one I gave you. I try to let you know it's there. You guys haven't allocated it for anything. It's just floating in the general. I said on the last report, the options are you don't go into the fund balance, the two million or are we going to hire more people or Financial Director or police? That's my plug. Or police? Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: In light of what Janice is telling me, I'd like to see if Bill could talk to them and get a week extension. I'd like to go over the new numbers and figure out just what we do have. Gordon: I can always call them. Bird: See if you can get to the 2nd or the 3rd of February because we have to work on it the first; am I not right? (inaudible) Corrie: (inaudible) They extended it until the end of January - ask them again to extend it again, I don't know how the federal government works. You know as well as I do. Bird: (inaudible) They've extended it for two years since I've been on the Council. Corrie: It's up to you. We have a motion - ( " Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 17 Bird: (inaudible) Corrie: -- motion before the Council. Okay. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: I guess I have a concern that we delay this. It sounds like we have a sufficient amount of money in the budget to cover it, and if we delay it until February 1 st, I'm not going to be here. I would like to participate in this vote. Corrie: Okay. Any further discussion? Bird: Let's vote. Question. Corrie: Okay. The question's been called for. The motion is do we accept the reconsideration and accept the police grant for the two officers in this request. Let's do a roll-call vote; Roll-call vote: McCandless, aye; Anderson, aye; deWeerd, aye; Bird, no. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE NAY Corrie: Thank you, Bill. Gordon: Mayor, Council, thank you. Item 2. Ordinance No. 853 Solid Waste Collection Services I Franchise: Corrie: Ordinance No. - excuse me. Agenda No.2, Ordinance No. 853, solid waste collection services I franchise. City Clerk, if you will read Ordinance No. 853 by title only, please. ORDINANCE NO. 853: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, RELATING TO THE GRANTING OF A FRANCHISE FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL PROVIDING FOR A TITLED DEFINITION SETTING FORTH THE AUTHORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO GRANT THE FRANCHISE AND LICENSE SETTING A TERM OF GRANTING A FRANCHISE ORDINANCE FOR SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL THROUGH SANITARY SERVICE, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION AND SETTING A TERM COMMENCING SEPTEMBER 9,1999, AND EXTENDING TO AT LEAST SEPTEMBER 30,2010; PROVIDING FOR A SEVEN-YEAR ADVANCE NOTICE OF TERMINATION; PROVIDING FOR ACCEPTANCE; PROVIDING FOR SPECIFIC CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR GENERAL CONDITIONS; PROVIDING FOR INDEMNITY; PROVIDING FOR COMPENSATION, LIABILITY ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 18 AND PROPERTY INSURANCE; PROVIDING FOR LIMITATION ON FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR ASSIGNMENT OF FRANCHISE; PROVIDING FOR DEFAULT BY 8SI; PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE OF INVALIDITY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE, AND; PROVIDING ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IN CONFLICT ARE REPEALED AND RESCINDED, AND; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Corrie: Thank you, Mr. Bird. Is there anyone from the public that would like to have Ordinance No. 853 read in its entirety? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion on Ordinance No. 853. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. *** End of Side 1 *** Bird: I move we approve Ordinance 853, the solid waste collection and services franchise with a suspension of rules. Anderson: I'll second that. Corrie: Motion is made and seconded that we approve Ordinance No. 853 with suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll-call vote. Roll-call vote: Mrs. McCandless, aye; Mr. Bird, aye; Mrs. deWeerd, aye; Mr. Anderson, aye. Corrie: All ayes, motion carried. Ordinance No. 853 has been approved. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Berg: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Berg. Berg: Along with that Franchise Ordinance, we do have a signed agreement, Resolution No. 285, and I think it'd be appropriate to approve that Resolution at this time. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion on the Resolution No. 285 approving the agreement. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. ( Meridian City Council January 1812000 Page 19 Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve Resolution No. 285 on the franchise agreement. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve Resolution No. 285 on the franchise agreement. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: You will probably (inaudible) Mr. Berg (inaudible). Item 3. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning (R-T TO R-4) by Charles Crane - located at 3610 W. Ustick Road: Corrie: Item No.3 is a, public hearing request for annexation and zoning, R-T to R-4 by Charles Crane located at 3610 West Ustick Road. At this time, I'll open the public hearing and invite staffs comments first. Thank you. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, as we discussed in Pre-Council, this is a request by the applicant to change some of the original conditions of approval; specifically, they would begin on Page 3 of the Recommendation to City Council and would extend to Page 4 with Items 1.7 through 1.12. The basic changes needed is to add on Page 3 before Item 1.7 that if the Ada County Highway District receives a development proposal, the District intends to provide the following requirements, and then go on with those requirements, but not to make them an initial requirement of annexation. Mr. Crane's here tonight. If he has anything to add to that, has any other comments. That's all I had. Corrie: Any other staff comments? Hearing none, all right., I'll open the public hearing for the request for annexation and zoning. Is Mr. Crane or representative here this evening? Crane: Hello, again. My name is Charles Crane. I'm at 3610 West Ustick Road. I'm the applicant. Councilperson deWeerd probably remembers this from July. This was originally a simple one-time split, and I've went through the City Ordinance with the staff, and everything seems to be real simple and straight- forward. This has taken quite a long time, and one of the points is the road department had a list of future requirements that was mistakenly applied to this rezoning and annexing. There is a letter in the file from Steve Siddoway that tried to bring this to the attention of the Council on September 20th where it lists the mistake in the record that the road department only required those for a future subdivision if things have changed; if there was being resubdivided or resubmitted in some future with the sidewalks and other requirements they listed Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 20 would only be required at that time. Since then, the director of ACHD also sent a letter to the City Council to restate that fact. So you guys have that. So, basically, I'm just requesting that those items that were put in by mistake, the sidewalk and easement and other things be taken off the Development Agreement. Just basic, simple annexing and zoning. Corrie: Okay. Questions from Council? Bird: I have none. deWeerd: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Crane: All right. There is one other point. This has created a pretty severe financial hardship because this is being drawn out this long. One of the stipulations is that water and sewer be connected when I get annexed and rezoned. I was going to ask if that could be postponed - in the letter from Steve Siddoway if we could postpone it until I had a buyer for the land because of the delay of these hearings, all my finances I had set aside to pay for those things are gone now. I was hoping I could wait until I had a buyer for the land before I had to hook up to the City water and sewer; if I could have a delay put in the Development Agreement. Corrie: Mr. Smith. Smith: Yes, sir. Corrie: Do you have any comment on that at this point? Other than maybe get some counseling from the attorney on where we should go with this? Smith: I guess my only comment would be that the Ordinance has a requirement for connection if the property is within 300 feet of sewer or water lines. So, the provisions of that Ordinance would need to be (inaudible) if that's your desire. That's about the only thing I could speak to, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: What he's saying is it would take a variance from the Ordinance to do that. It's- Crane: It's my understanding that you have the authority. Corrie: Council can do that. Gigray: I think that's a Planning and Zoning Ordinance. Is that in the Subdivision or Zoning Ordinance? (inaudible) subject to a variance. ( Meridian City Council January 18. 2000 Page 21 Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, it is in the Sewer Use and the Water Use Ordinance, yes, sir. Corrie: Mr. Gigray, could that be possible then, on the variance? (inaudible) land use. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, it's not a matter of which I have reviewed for this meeting because I wasn't aware this was going to be an issue, but generally speaking, those ordinances proscribe a certain time period within which they have to hook up, and it isn't like it's immediate. I don't know if it's a year or whatever it is. As I understand our variances, they generally apply to Zoning Ordinance criteria and subdivision criteria and aren't generally applicable to regulations over the water and sewer system. Basically, the requirement for hookup when hookup is available is to protect the integrity of this system and also usually many systems are started with bonding and whatever and bonding agents require those kind of conditions be an ordinance to assure that the ability of the system to repay the obligation of the bond, and it could be - it's not an uncommon thing to be in city ordinances. There may be a provision in the code. I'm just not aware at this time, for him to apply for some kind of relief. That'd be a matter, I think, that should be dealt with separately under the terms of that ordinance, not as part of this application. Corrie: Okay. Is that all right with you? Crane: Yeah. If the time period is like a year or something, that would be fine. think somebody at the Council had mentioned 15 days. Bird: That's what the ordinance, I think, does say: 15 days from annexation. Crane: If it's 15 days, if I could get some kind of relief from that if it's within your power. Smith: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Smith. Smith: I've made this statement to the Council to you and to the Council before. I'm not out looking for customers for sewer and water. We've got lots of them, and there's more coming. This particular use certainly wouldn't impair or impede us in gathering customers. I certainly, personally, wouldn't have a problem with waiving this requirement. Legally, if that's how you need to go about it, that's another question. In terms of you asking me if I had any concerns about this, I would not. Corrie: Thank you. We'll take it up separately from this one - annexation. Anything else? Okay. This is a public hearing. Is there anyone else in the public Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 22 that would like to issue testimony on Item No.3? Hearing none, Council, any questions or discussion? deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: What would the step be for the applicant then to take, or could - is it a possibility we can make that a condition upon application of a building permit? Can we just build that into the Development Agreement or does he have to specifically, formally apply for a variance? Gigray: Mr. Mayor, Councilman deWeerd, members of the Council, the procedure will be if there is one available, should be proscribed in the ordinance. I just don't have it in front of me, and I wouldn't presuppose at this point to answer that question because I don't know the answer to it. Certainly, I would think the immediate control over those provisions of the ordinance would be with the Public Works Department because they are the ones who administer for the most part, the Water and Sewer Ordinances of the City. If there is some available relief in this instance, I would think that could be handled at least on initial review at a department level. Now, the department could look at it and determine that the terms of the ordinance are unduly restrictive and provide for hookup in too short of period and could request this office with the approval of the Mayor to prepare an ordinance that would amend that to extend the amount of time. I know that time in other cities is longer. I know in some areas it's as much as a year or so. But I don't think that - I wouldn't advise this Council to waive provisions of your ordinance that are mandatory as a condition of a Development Agreement. I don't think it'd be proper. Corrie: Any other questions? deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: So, Gary, can you meet with the applicant and let him know what the procedure would be, then? Corrie: Hearing no other discussion, I'll entertain a motion on the request for annexation and zoning. Bird: We've got to close the public hearing. Corrie: Sorry. You're absolutely right. I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. ' ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 23 Bird: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Any further discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Then I'll entertain a motion on the request for annexation and zoning for the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Order to be taken up. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we have the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of Order for the request for annexation and zoning, R-T to R-4, by Charles Crane located at 3610 West Ustick Road in a favorable comment. Corrie: Is there a second to that motion? deWeerd: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion's made and seconded to have the attorney draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and the proper ordinance for the annexation and zoning for Item No. 3 from R- T to R-4 by Charles Crane. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I just had a comment. I agree with Council. I think we set a dangerous precedent when you do the annexations and just waive your ordinances, and I think the proper procedure would be to change the ordinance first and not grant a variance in this case. It seems like we're doing it backwards to me, and we're setting a precedence, and we're inviting anybody else in similar situations to get their property annexed and increase the value, change it to a different zoning ahead of putting up the development costs and stuff like that. So it's my feeling that this wouldn't be the proper way to do this. Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 24 Bird: We're not changing any variance. Anderson: But you're approving it without water and sewer hookup. Bird: No, I'm not. I didn't say that. My motion does not carry that. Anderson: Okay. Bird: I didn't take any variances in that. Anderson: All right. deWeerd: No. The applicant is supposed to work with Gary on the procedure. Bird: That isn't in the motion. The motion is cut and dry. It's as per our ordinance. There's no variance. Anderson: Okay. Corrie: Yeah. The motion is to have the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Ordinance drawn up for the annexation and zoning. Anderson: Okay. Thank you. Corrie: Thank you. Any further discussion? Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Point of - request for clarification. The draft Findings and Conclusions of Law that we prepared for which this matter was re-opened included some Findings of the adoption of the Recommendation of the Engineering Department and there were certain requests that adopted conditions and recommendations of the Ada County Highway District which were set out on Page 5 and Page 6 of those proposed Findings. I think, as I understand it, that was the heart of what the complaint of what this applicant was were those conditions, and if I understand his motion correctly, for re-opening this public hearing was to eliminate those conditions alone, and then he brought up the one additional point about hooking up to the sewer system, but I think all you need to do, if this is your desire, would be to simply eliminate those Ada County Highway District recommendations and Findings in that I think the import of this was that they would be able to address that as such time as they would develop this property and that you could just simply direct me to eliminate those conditions from the Findings and Decision of Order as well as the Development Agreement and then I could proceed to bring those back to you with those eliminated based on this action for your final action and adoption at the next meeting would be our normal process. ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 25 Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: That's what the motion was for was for the reason we had re-opened this was to get rid of the Ada County Highway District thing. So my motion was to make a new Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law without those in there because that's the reason we had done it. Does that clear it up? Gigray: That's clear. Bird: That's what my motion is. There's no variance or nothing. deWeerd: That's what my second was. Corrie: Good enough. I'm glad we're on the same page. Bird: Now we can get going. Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 4. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning of 20.05 acres from M-1 TO I-L by Albertson's, Inc. - east of Eagle Road, north of the railroad tracks and south of Settlers Canal: Corrie: Item No. 4 is a public hearing. This is a request for annexation and zoning of 20.05 acres from M-1 to I-L by Albertson's, Inc. east of Eagle Road and north of the railroad tracks and south of Settler's Canal. At this time, I'll open the public hearing on Item No.4 and invite City Staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the existing Albertson's Sundries facility at the eastern end of Commercial Court off of Eagle Road. In the recommendations to City Council, I had some suggestions for some changes. On Page 1, Item 6 to complete the sentence: properties located east of Eagle Road at the present easterly terminus (sic) of Commercial Court in Meridian. Page 3, Item 1.2 just to fix the typographical error on "require." On Item 1.8, I don't believe this was brought up at the Planning and Zoning Commission under signage. I would like the Council to consider adding to that that free-standing signs should be limited to a maximum height of 20 feet as a - Anderson: That is on 1.8? Stiles: 1.8 on Page 3. That that be included as a condition of annexation. I think with those changes and with the applicant's compliance with all ordinances in ( (- Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 26 effect at the time of issuance of building permit, it is my understanding they would like to discontinue their septic and well system if that exists out there so that they can add onto the facility. I would recommend that on Page 4, Item 1.11, the requirement for a Development Agreement be deleted. Corrie: Thank you. Anything else, Shari? Stiles: That's all I had. Corrie: All right. This is a public hearing and it's open. Hear from the developer, Albertson's, representative here tonight. Beckstrom: We're here, Mr. Mayor. We're not prepared to comment (inaudible) Corrie: I can hear you, but sometimes the recorder doesn't. One of the questions I have in this, the questions and deletions and additions at the Planning and Zoning Director did, do you have any problems with those? Beckstrom: No, sir. Corrie: Your name? Beckstrom: My name is Brad Beckstrom. I live at 11429 West Colony Street in Boise. Corrie: Could you please spell your last name, please. Beckstrom: B-E-C-K-S- T -R-O-M. Corrie: Anything else you'd like to add? Beckstrom: No, sir. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else from the audience that would like to participate in the public hearing on Item No.4? Okay. Any questions of the Council? Bird: I have none. Corrie; I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing on Item No.4. Bird: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No.4. All those in favor of the motion say aye. ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 27 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Council, discussion, recommendations? Vote? Bird: I have no questions. Anderson: No questions. Corrie: All right. Then I'll entertain a motion on the request for annexation and zoning of the 20.05 acres from the M-1 to I-L by Albertson's, Inc. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would like to make a motion that we approve the request for annexation and zoning for 20.05 acres for Albertson's, Inc., with suspension of rules. Bird: Second. Anderson: Subject to staff comments on Page 1, Item No.6 and Page 3, 1.2 and 1.8. Bird: Now I'll second it. Corrie: Motion's made and seconded to approve the request for annexation and zoning of the Albertson's Inc., Item No.4 with the corrections and staff comments addedtothereque~. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Councilman Anderson, you did include the deletion of Item 1.11? Anderson: Yes. I would like that included in my motion. Bird: My second does, too. Corrie: Okay. That'll be included in the motion. All right. Any other discussion? Roll-call vote; Mr. Anderson, aye; Mr. Bird, aye; Mrs. deWeerd, aye; Mrs. McCandless, aye. ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 28 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Item 5. Public Hearing: Request for vacation of 2 O-foot emergency access of Mirage Meadows Subdivision to a new access located at the end of Oakcrest Drive by Robert Higgins, et al - Block 1, ,Lots 16 and 17 of Mirage Meadows Subdivision and Lots 19 and 20 of Chateau Meadows east located at the end of Oakcrest Drive: Corrie: Item No.5, this is a public hearing request for vacation of 20-foot emergency access by Mirage Meadows Subdivision to a new access located at the end of Oakcrest Drive by Robert Higgins, et ai, Block 1, Lots 16 and 17 of Mirage Meadows Subdivision and Lots 19 and 20 of Chateau Meadows East located at the end of O~kcrest Drive. I'll open the public hearing and invite staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for an existing emergency access that also serves as a pedestrian walkway between Mirage Meadows and Chateau Meadows north of Fred Meyer. The complaint has been that there's been vandalism occurring along that section and the adjacent property owners would like that access to be discontinued. As you can see, there's this access here. There's very little inter-neighborhood access here. What they've proposed is that this be used as the access between the neighborhoods. Unfortunately, this is still county property, and the City does not control development of that piece. I don't know (inaudible). I would like the Fire Chief, Kenny Bowers, to make some comments on this and set forth his recommendation. Bowers: Mayor Corrie and City Council, when we first started talking about this, I was quite concerned because I didn't realize that the City had a piece of property in that yellow piece right by that arrow. I figured it was all county, and I didn't know how we were going to do this. But after Shari pulled it up, there is just a little piece of property that is the road that is the City property there. My biggest concern, also, was the elevation difference between where the arrow is and Oakcrest. We have taken a truck down there in that area and looked it over. With a little bit of grading, we should be able to get the elevations satisfiable to myself for the fire trucks. We did try to work out to put a gate there that we could just come up and cut the chain and go through it that way, so that would be okay with us at this time until that piece gets developed. My biggest concern is who is going to maintain that road back to that one house like in the wintertime? Part of it is asphalt, part of it's gravel, part of it's dirt. That was one of my concerns. They are still going to have to use that as a walkway to get to Fred Meyer so that gate will not be the full length of the road, to my knowledge. And we will have to make sure that there's no parking so we can swing that gate open so we're not - so the gate will not fling back and hit another vehicle and damage it, scratch it. A lot of the people, from what I understand, that visit this place here, the older house there in the county, they do park at the end of Oakcrest. So we're going to ( ( Meridian City Council January 1812000 Page 29 have to make sure we get some signs up or something, no parking in that area. Does City Council have any other questions? Bird: I have none. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I have a question. More of SharL So the piece we're talking about is that little, thin sliver, the yellow piece? Right there? Stiles: He's talking about this little yellow - Bowers: City Council members, Ron Anderson, that piece right there will be part of the road that we have been discussing. The circle, the red circle to the left of that, right there, that's the part that they want to close between those four homes right there. I think the next slide has it on it, Shari. Right there. That's the piece that they want to close between the four homes. That's Oakcrest there on the bottom that runs left and right and it runs into Dixie Lane, the old Dixie Lane. Right there. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Chief Bowers, is it called a pedestrian path or is it a road? What is that? Bowers: Mayor Corrie and City Council members, right now there is two big concrete barriers that Ada County or somebody has put there so they cannot drive from Oakcrest to the old Dixie Lane. Yes, they do that - they use that as a pedestrian walkway for those subdivisions to get to Fred Meyer and to the Chevron Station and to school. deWeerd: So what is it made up of? Is it pavement? Bowers: The pavement ends right - are you talking about - deWeerd: What you will be using as the emergency access. Bowers: Okay. Right there. That's partial pavement. Right where the arrow's at, it starts to dirt and gravel. They will be - if you pull the arrow up just a little bit farther, right there, they will put a gate that swings right there. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. (" Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 30 Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I guess I'm confused what that piece of property has to do with the other one that they're asking to vacate, then. Bird: I'm with you. Bowers: City Council members, Mayor Corrie and Ron Anderson, years ago, this subdivision was developed, and upon the recommendation of City Council that they would put that access road in the circle into this development because that is the only way into this piece of the subdivision until Oakcrest gets built through. One way in, one way out of this subdivision. Locust Grove on your left comes in, you go one way in, one way out, and the access to get into this location for emergency vehicles was' in that circle. We thought by now that Oakcrest would be punched through, but I'm not sure what the problem is of purchasing that property . Anderson: So the place where the arrow is sitting right now is not the access road that you're talking about? deWeerd: It is. Anderson: Where it is? Bowers: A new access road. The new proposed access road, yeah. The one in the circle is the old access road right there. Anderson: Okay. So you're proposing vacating that one and creating a new one. Bowers: That's what they are proposing, yes. Anderson: Okay. Get this straight. (inaudible discussion amongst Council members) Corrie: Shari. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, you have our comments of December 3, 1999. Just like to reiterate that the children in this subdivision do use this micropath to go from Oakcrest Drive to Meadow Wood Street which is right here, and then they get up to Chateau because this is where they have a crossing guard assist them to get across Locust Grove Road; otherwise, these children are going to be forced to come out to Locust Grove and up here where I don't believe there are any sidewalks yet. Are there? They indicate there are sidewalks. Of course, ( \ ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 31 this is all going to be widened. We are also concerned about the lack of interneighborhood connectivity because they really don't have any real access to the other neighborhoods. That's alii had. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Shari, I have in front of me the Recommendation to City Council from p & Z, and I only have two pages to this. Were there not - I believe that P & Z had some additional comments that should be included in this. Do you - Stiles: All I have is two pages. Bird: Yeah. That's alii have. It stops right there. deWeerd: Mr. Gigray, do you have additional ones? Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, Councilman deWeerd, no. deWeerd: It seems like an odd place to just stop. Bird: It's just a recommendation. deWeerd: No. I know there was something else with this, but I don't have the minutes. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, point of information. I might encourage the Councilor the Mayor to inquire of staff with regards as to what the actual statement is on the plat that dedicates the particular item which is before you because it might clarify what kind of a dedication it was. It is my concern that this is a dedication that would be an emergency access, or it could be considered in some way a road right-of-way. My opinion would be that the City Council could certainly entertain this application for its approval as would be required, but it would come under the jurisdiction of the Ada County Highway District because they're the ones that are in charge of roads and streets in this county. It seems a little unclear to me from the information that I have in my packet as to the very nature of this particular easement for which this application applies. I assume there's a note on the plat or something that designates what it is, and maybe I'm just missing it and it's in here somewhere. ,r ( ( Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 32 Corrie: Do you have that plat there, Shari? Is there - (inaudible) that he's asking? Stiles: It is emergency access. Corrie: Okay. Council, do you have any other questions of staff at this point? Okay. Since this is a public hearing, I'll hear from the applicant. Higgins: Hello. I'm Bob Higgins. I live at 2064 North Applewood Place. In reference to Ada County Highway District, they've already stated they have no interest. It was not recommended by them, and the property that's involved belongs to the people' who - the easement crosses their land. Ada County has no interest in it. The only reason that was there was this subdivision - may I - does somebody have a laser or can I - Basically, when 1- deWeerd: Sir, you can use that microphone. No. Right here on the stand. And you can take it off the stand if you would like. Higgins: The reason - my understanding was when this easement was put in, this emergency easement, that's all it was granted for, fire trucks to get into the subdivision, is because this subdivision at the time was not developed. And it was crossed out - in reference to paved, it's gravel right in here, and then starting down from this point becomes pavement all the way down to Fairview. So from this point here down to here, we're looking at pavement. The school - in reference to the school problems, in reference to their talking about kids going through there, it was never considered to be a pedestrian right-of-way, but as of next year, all students in this subdivision here will be going down through this subdivision because the new school is being built over right here for our subdivision. In reference to the kids walking through that alleyway, basically, they're getting good sex education because they're writing all sorts of foul language, putting obscene pictures on my fence. The liability suit of all four neighbors in this are liable if anybody gets hurt, falls down, we're liable. They can come to our insurance company and nail us. I would like to bring up one comment from my neighbor who had been walking through there, we've got a scare. Last week, as a matter of fact. His name is Joe Paswalk. Paswalk: Council, I'm Joe Paswalk, 2041 North Applewood Place. The problem in there is it's really dark. My problem with the whole thing is safety of everybody, both subdivisions. The other night I came through there and the kids were sitting along the fence, couldn't see them, you know, it was really quite a heartstopper when you're going around the corner to walk in there, and you're just right there in the dark. I'm really concerned that we're going to have a problem out there to where we're going to have some residents hurt. That's kind of out of control right now. So that's my biggest concern. The little people that go back and forth in there, that's really great, but somebody's going to get run r ( ( Meridian City Council January 181 2000 Page 33 over on either end, now, because the traffic has gotten more and more out there. So I think that's my biggest concern in that walkpath out there. Thank you. Higgins: Last week before we left, I had also a letter here from Richard Stagnaro (sic). He lives on - in our cul-de-sac. He just wanted to be of record that the kids traveling between both those subdivisions, they're cutting across - when they come across, they're shooting through here and cutting right across the lawns here of Joe Paswalk and Richard Stagnaro is right here. They've got a little berm there. The kids will come right across his lawn and jump his berm. So it's just getting real irritating. I've been living there for about six years, and I finally just can't take it anymore. It's just been - this last year has just been the final point where I've got to say I can't afford the risk. I've backed up and come close to hitting kids through there, and on top of it, when I did my research and found out we own the property and we're liable, if we don't get it authorized, then I would think that we're going to be entitled to close it off manually so the Fire Department could go through it. It'll stop congestion traffic. So, it is not guaranteed a pedestrian walkway. It's only an emergency access. It was only supposed to be temporary at that point. So I'd like to give this letter and make it part of the record if you would, please. Corrie: Thank you. Council, any questions? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Sir, how long has that been used as an - I know you stated as an emergency pathway, but how long has it been used as a public pathway? Higgins: I've been there since February '93. Bird: '93. And that right-of-way is actually part of your deeded lot? Higgins: It's part of my deeded lot. There's a letter from Ada County saying they have no fee interest in that property. Bird: Are you talking about the matter from Christy Richardson (sic)? Higgins: Is she from Ada County Highway District? Bird: Yeah. Ada County Highway District staff has received and reviewed the application and site plan for the item referenced above. Higgins: No. There's a letter that says there is no fee interest in that property. Bird: It says don't have any site requirements at this time. ,,{~ Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 34 Higgins: It was hand - it was delivered to you. Hold on. I might have a copy of that here. Bird: That one is from Christy Richardson of ACHD> Higgins: It was dated December 14th because I got it the day of a meeting. Bird: Mine is December 1st the one I've got here. Higgins: There's a letter from Ada County Highway District that's dated December 14th which they stated they had a no-fee, simple interest in that property. Corrie: Mr. Higgins, do you have that in your file? It might help us a little bit. deWeerd: Would it be the one dated November 4th? Higgins: No. This is just - I got it the day they signed off on it on December 14th when we had that meeting because I just got it that afternoon. They said it was part at this file, so I didn't bring it with me. (inaudible) It was part ot the record when we were here on the 14th, and Tammy, you were here at that time. I handed it in at that point. You could check the records. It should be part of your records. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I'm not sure the letter from ACHD would have any real relevance whether they're charging a fee or not. I just - Higgins: No. What it states is they don't have an interest in that party. Basically what the letter is saying is that the property involved is owned by the lot - the homeowners - the property that easement crosses. Anderson: I understand that. You mentioned that they're going to build a new grade school off to the east of that; how will the kids from your subdivision access it? Is there a way to get from Oakcrest on down to that (inaudible) Avenue? Higgins: Yeah. Right through here there's a public right-at-way, ten-foot access from the sidewalks here that goes across this lot here to North Dixie Lane. The- if you'll check the records, the Planning and Zoning guy that was here before verified that. / I Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 35 Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Just a couple more questions. Robert, P & Z staff themselves recommended keeping that, and Planning and Zoning recommended closing it. p & Z staff recommended possibly opening that up a little bit. It sounds like you must have six-foot high cedar fence or something on each side of it right now. Has there been any thought by the homeowners to go ahead and open that up with a chain-link fence or a lower fence so the visibility could be improved to kind of discourage kids from hanging out there? Higgins: I like my privacy. I don't like people walking through and seeing what I'm doing in my backyard, plus the lower the fences, we've got two people with hot tubs back there. The liability if we don't keep high fences, we can get sued. Either that or lose our homeowners. Right now, I'll be really - I think we're going to be in a Catch-22 situation for anybody who gets hurt in there, and our homeowners pays for it and they find out they're on the hook for that every time somebody gets hurt because my - it's just like a dog biting. Your insurance will pay for it once, but if it happens again, they'll cancel your homeowners. When they put that in there, the City Council before, I think they forgot about the liability factor of the - *** End of Side 2 *** bicycles, making rumps and jumping in there. These - the Balls who live in the - right here on this (inaudible) Meadowwood, she's not here tonight, but she's come close to - their driveway's right next to the fence and backing out, kids come around through there and she comes close to hitting a kid of their bicycles. So it's just a matter of - it's not - if it's going to happen, it's just a matter of when it's going to happen. The vandalism that I've had on my fence, I mean, I was going to have to report it to insurance, and I'm not looking forward to that, because when it happens, they're going to say we'll pay for it once, but come next time, who's going to pay for it? I have to pay for it? I don't think that's right. Corrie: Anything else? Higgins: No, that's it for me. Corrie: Thank you. Anyone else like to testify? Okay. Questions of the Council? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 36 Anderson: One more question for Mr. Gigray, a legal question. The homeowners had talked about their liability. Educate me a little bit. The pathways now that are being created in newer subdivisions, are those common areas? Is that why there's no liability with those homeowners and this is set up differently because this was an emergency access at the time, or do the current ones that we require or ask for, do they still have the same liability? Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I think the issue ot liability would be fact-driven, and that would be what is actually happening out there. If these property owners are in possession and maintaining possession of the property and are aware of or have conditions there knowing it's public use, it would be endangerment to people using it, I would say they probably incur some liability. If this is, in tact, a dedicated right-at-way, which it sounds to me like it is, to me, the ownership interest of that right-at-way would be held by the Ada County Highway District. What these property owners, if they've got some concerns about liability or, in fact, damage to their property by the public use of that, that they need to confer with Ada County Highway District about closing it off. One ot the things that I think is going to be difficult for you to make a decision about this application, and I might urge that you might consider continuing this hearing to get more information is I'd like to see what the plat says and the language of the dedication. It sounds to me like the evidence produced so far would indicate that there's been public use of this tor a period of greater than five years which, I think, creates public right-at-way issues that get outside of the City's jurisdiction at this point other than your jurisdiction to consent any vacation of that right-of- way by the Highway District. It it's like we maintain pathways within our parks systems, and that's into the jurisdiction of the City, and it's the City's responsibility and not the private property owner. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Bird: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No.5. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Public hearing is closed. Any further discussion? deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. [" Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 37 Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: How do we obtain the information on if it's a dedicated right-of-way and it's not? Corrie: Shari, Gary? Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, I'm looking at a reduced copy of the plat from Mirage Meadows which was recorded in 1990. A reduced copy of the plat of Chateau Meadows East No. 1 which was recorded in 1990. Both plats show this as a 20-foot wide emergency access easement. It's not a dedicated public right-of-way by the plat. The plat from Mirage Meadows shows it as a 20-foot emergency access easement, fenced both sides with 20-foot of asphalt pavement. So it was dedicated as an easement on the plat. An easement only. deWeerd: So it's not a right-at-way. Smith: It's not dedicated as a right-of-way if there's something about use of the property over a period of time, as Mr. Gigray commented that it turns it into a public right-at-way, I don't know. But the plat did not dedicate it as a public right- of-way. It showed it as an easement across the property. deWeerd: And when was that platted? Smith: 1990. Corrie: So, Mr. Gigray, then we could vacate that property; correct? Or not? Yau hesitated a bit. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I think first of all you've closed the public hearing. If we're going to get additional information, I would just think procedurally you should re-open the public hearing to receive that. I'd certainly be more than happy to look at that, but quite frankly, it seems to me that there's a dedication for emergency access or for access, we're getting into issues for right- at-way. You can have access of ingress and egress that are easements to properties which are right-af-way and if the dedication says it's dedication to the public, then I think we need to examine that to determine what the rights are there in terms of the potential interest ot the Ada County Highway District. Now, we have in the past granted vacations and then put a notice in that order of vacation that the applicant is advised that they may wish to seek the approval of the Ada County Highway District as kind of a hedge of representing whether or not the City has that ultimate authority, and then they would proceed to the Ada County Highway District. It they decline that they have any interest in it, they could get a ruling from the Commission and that might resolve the issue. That's just an issue that comes to my mind. The City would have to approve it if the Ada County Highway District were going to vacate it, it would have to have the Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 38 City's approval because it's in the City. I mean, it wouldn't be a waste of time to go through this with - it makes a little difference on how I write up an order if you were going to grant this. It's one of my concerns. Corrie: So that I am hearing what I think I'm hearing, you're asking that we open the public hearing back up and table it - continue the public hearing to the next meeting until we get information; is that correct? Gigray: Well, either that or at least receive the information that the Public Works Director provided so we can get that plat information into the record. I don't have it in my packet. It may be there and I just don't know it. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we re-open the public hearing for Mirage Meadows Subdivision. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to re-open the public hearing on Item No.5. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. Re-open the hearing. If you will please enter that testimony on the record. Smith: Thank you, Mr. Mayor, Council members. The two plats involved in this request are Chateau Meadows East No.1. It was created in 1990. Mirage Meadows Subdivision also created in 1990. Both of these are recorded subdivisions at Ada County Recorders Office. The easement under question is noted on the plat as Chateau Meadows East No. 1 as a twenty-foot emergency access easement, fenced both sides with 20 feet of AC pavement. The easement description on Mirage Meadows Subdivision is a 20-foot emergency access easement, fenced both sides with 20 feet of AC pavement. These are shown as easements, ten feet each side of the property line as platted. I think that was all I related to you earlier. Corrie: Okay. Mr. Gigray, is that what we needed? Gigray: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: All right. Any other discussion of the public hearing? ,- - ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 39 Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Question tor Mr. Gigray, then. Does that testimony change any of your thoughts about that there's still some question about whether this would be a dedicated right-ot-way or not? Gigray: My opinion is what I've heard that it is. That's my opinion. At the same time, even if it is, the Council is required to give its approval, although, I think the proper procedure in those instances is to make application to ACHD, they run it through, and then you run your approval to them. But we've done it the other way. It just makes a difference in the language I do in the Order if you grant this. Now, I believe this applicant may want to address what's been said here. Higgins: Yeah. I would. ,Gigray: That's up to you, Mr. Mayor. I'm sorry. Corrie: That'd be fine if you give your name, please, again. Higgins: My name's Robert Higgins, I'm at 2064 North Applewood Place. I went to Ada County Highway District. They - that's the reason I got that letter that's in here, and I can get you another copy of that letter that says they have a no-fee interest, simple interest in that property. I've got a license application that's been approved to put the gate up. Ada County Highway District, the letter that's part ot your file, you should have it, they have no interest in it. They've - was not a requirement for them when they put that subdivision, when this subdivision went in. So what they told me is I have to go before City Council. Now you're telling me to go back to Ada County Highway District again so they can provide you another letter that says they have no interest. I'm - I hate to say this, but bureaucracy here is kind ot driving me wild here because I'm trying to get things resolved, and Ada County Highway District - it's not a requirement. It was never a requirement for that easement to be put in. The City of Meridian put it in. The plat I've got here, all it says is it's an emergency access only. So I'm trying to jump through the hoops here and make everybody happy, but I can't - I wish I would have kept - I went through my stuff to get rid of stuff which I didn't think I needed, and that letter was part of it because I had a copy of it. Let's see. That's - you've got the copy. This is a plat which I got with my title report on this property. I'll - let me show it to Mr. Bill Gigray. Gigray: What he read was what's on the back of the plat. Bird: (inaudible) Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 40 Higgins: So I would like to get this matter resolved without having to come back and get this matter resolved. I mean, I don't know what else I can provide you. Corrie: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Higgins. Okay. Anybody else for a public hearing? Information? Okay. Bird: I move we close the public hearing. Anderson: I'll second it again. Corrie: Motion's made and seconded to close the public hearing. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. You have your two choices here, folks; you can approve the request for vacation to the Councilor you can do what Mr. Gigray suggests. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I'm going to try this. I move that we get the Findings of Facts and Decision of Order for the request of vacation for the 20-foot emergency access of Mirage Meadows Subdivision to a new access - I don't know why that is even in it, but at the end of Oakcrest Drive by Robert Higgins, Block 1, Lot 16 and 17 of Mirage Meadows Subdivision and Lots 19 and 20 at Chateau Meadows East located at the end of Oakcrest Drive and that they are to in this motion, they are to go after we pass it, they are to go get it approved by ACHD. Corrie: Okay. Motion made by Mr. Bird. Is there a second to the motion? Hearing none, motion died for lack of second. I'll entertain another motion. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Can there be discussion? I would like to know why he was suggesting to go to ACHD on when this was not a dedicated right-af-way. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I believe that it being open to the public for five years it is a right-at-way and it can be proven to be a right-at-way, a public right-ot-way that's been used tor five years as a public access even thought the plat does call (inaudible). Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Are you done, Keith? I'm sorry. I have questions. It sounds like we still have discrepancy between what our legal counsel is telling (' Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 41 us, what he believes and what the City Engineer and what the applicant believes, and I guess for me to vote on this with a clear conscience, I'd like to have this cleared up first. I sympathize with the applicant, and I don't want to send him running back and forth to ACHD a million times. Is that something that our staff could clear up between Bill and Gary, or would it require more visits to ACHD? Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, Councilman Anderson, to answer your question, there's a possibility if I could look at the plat and the language on the back of the plat which I don't have in front of me, I don't know if this is a dedication to the public. If it is a dedication to the public which is standard language that I've seen in plats that show that they're dedicating these various things and it is, in fact, an access for emergency vehicles, I don't think that providing access to some private property owner to have emergency access across this to another piece of property. So therefore, it would seem that it would be some kind of dedication to the public which I think raises jurisdictional issues here which you don't have in other counties where you don't have a county highway district because the City's in control of its roads and streets as well, and can handle the whole thing itself. My understanding of the law with regards to Highway District law is that they are in control of the public rights-ot-way whether they're dedicated or otherwise and it's properly within their jurisdiction to do final authority on vacation. As far as easements are concerned for utilities, we've been able to clarify with them that they don't claim that jurisdiction. We have interpreted the statute to provide that the City can do that by following the procedure and we don't have the same problem. If this were utility easement, I wouldn't have this concern. Be that as it may, what we've done in the past is we have prepared Orders and simply granted the application, and you've directed so with the various Findings, and we've just provided a proviso in there that the applicant is advised to 'consult with the Ada County Highway District to get a determination from them as to whether or no they claim any interest in this right- of-way or not because, I assume, if they ever sell that property, that could show up as an exception on their title policy as to whether or not that vacation was done properly or not. I'm just telling you what my view is about the law in this particular regards. Yau can take whatever action you see fit, but I see that as an issue here. I can put that language in the order which was kind of what I understood the motion of Councilman Bird to be or I'll leave it out. Bird: That's what I meant. Anderson: Now with the explanation, I wouldn't mind seconding Councilman Bird's original motion if he wants to re-make it. Bird: Re-state it because I can't remember it. Go back to the tape. I'll make it again. Let's see. How did I do that? I move that ~e approve the vacation of 20- foot emergency access ot the Mirage Meadows,,:: Subdivision to a new access Meridian City Council January 18, 2CXX) Page 42 located at the end of Oakcrest Drive by Robert Higgins, Block 1, Lot 16 and 17 of Mirage Meadows Subdivision and Lots 19 and 20 of Chateau Meadows East located at the end of Oakcrest Drive with the addition of the owners are to go to Ada County Highway District and see if they have any interest in this. Anderson: IJII second that. Corrie: Okay. Motion is made and seconded~ Any further discussion on the motion? Okay. Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Anderson: Mr~ Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson Anderson: Following in the footsteps of my esteemed colleague and previous Council member Bentley, I would like to call for a ten-minute break~ Bird: Second~ Corrie: Motion made and seconded to take a ten-minute break~ All those in favor of the motion say aye~ MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES (Meeting reconvened at 9:45 p~m.) Corrie: We're on Item No.6. I'd like to take a call here. How many are here for the Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore? Okay. And how many are here for the Hawkins SmithJ the Walgreen's? Okay. We may not get to Items 9 and 1 o. If there - 1 0:30 if it lasts longer because VJe won't have enough time to get to all of them. We'll ask - at 10:30 we'll see where we are at about 10: 15. If we have enough time, we'll poll the Council and see if they want to add the Item 9 and 10 postponed until the meeting on February 1st. We'll kind of give you an idea where we are and see what the time is at that time~ Item 6. Public Hearing: Request for vacation of the easement lying adjacent to the lot line common to Lots 6 and 7, Block 3, Thunder Creek Subdivision by Thunder Creek Partnership, LLC - south of Cherry Lane, west of Ten Mile on Gray Cloud Way: Corrie: Item No~ 6, public hearing, this is a request for vacation of easement lying adjacent to the lot line common to Lots 6 and 7, Block 3, Thunder Creek Subdivision by Thunder Creek Partnership, LLC - south of Cherry Lane, west of Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 43 Ten Mile on Gray Cloud Way. At this time, I'll open the public hearing on Item No. 6 and invite the Council to - All right. Staff comments on Item No.6. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is for the Thunder Creek easement vacation? Corrie: That's correct. Stiles: I need to make some changes to the recommendations to City Council. On Page 1 under Item 1, second line, it should be east of Ten Mile. On Page 2, Item 7, I believe this was a carry-over from the previous application. This is not a matter of vandalism and trespassing. The applicant requests the easement vacation between Lots 6 and 7, Block 3 in order to obtain an adjustment of lot lines. (inaudible discussion) I wanted Gary to check on Item 10 whether those relinquishments had been received from the utilities. Do you have that in your file, Will? Relinquishments from the utilities on this? If Will doesn't have those in his file, we should probably strike Item 10 in its entirety. Corrie: Shari, is it we don't have a No.9? Stiles: Oh. Well, if you just strike Item 10, then you'll be okay. Corrie: All right. Stiles: I think that's covered in the Recommendation anyway that before you get any building permits, they'll have to furnish those relinquishments. This is just simply for adjustment of the lot lines so that they can accommodate some housing units that otherwise they couldn't build there. They will still meet the minimum requirements for an 8,OOO-square foot lot, 80-foot minimum frontage, and they - it's just made the lots, as you can see it the application, a little more workable for the builder. Staff recommends approval with the recommendations as amended. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Public has the request for the vacation on Item No.6, the audience. Does anyone else from the public like to enter testimony on Item No.6? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Seeing no one came forward, I would make a motion that we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. f \ ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2CX)() Page 44 Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No.6. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Discussion? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Is this a lot line adjustment/easement vacation? Is that what it is? Is that all it is is a lot line adjustment? Okay. We couldn't figure that out_ Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion on the request for vacation of easement, lying adjacent to the lot line in common to Lots 6 and 7, Block 3. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve the vacation of the easement on the Lots 6 and 7, Block 3 of Thunder Creek Subdivision subject to staff comments on Item 1; changing west to east and Item 7 inserting the words obtain an adjustment of lot line and removing the words prevent vandalism and trespassing has occurred on the lot on property lines; and deleting Item 10, and instruct the City Attorney to develop Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion is made and seconded to approve the recruits for vacation and easement of Lot No. 6 with the corrections that have been made by the Planning and Zoning Director and the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. "Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES Item 7. Public Hearing: Request for annexation and zoning of 10 acres from RT to LO for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View ,r - Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 45 Item 8. Public Hearing: Request for conditional use permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an ancillary restaurant in L-Q zone for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company - Eagle Road and Magic View: Corrie: Item No. 7 and 8 are public hearings on the Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company, and since there was no objection to opening both public hearings on 7 and 8, we will do so so we can have testimony on both of them. We'll take them one at a time when we do the requests. Item No.7 is public hearing, request for annexation and zoning of 10 acres from RT to L-Q for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company, Eagle Road and Magic View and also Item No. 8 is a public hearing, request for conditional use permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an ancillary restaurant in L-O zone proposed Magic View Office Complex. At this time I'll open the public hearing and have staff comments first. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I have some suggested changes to the recommendations to City Council. I'll begin with the annexation and zoning recommendations. On Page 1, Item 6 should read subject property is bordered to the north by Greenhill Estates Subdivision and city limits of the City of Meridian are adjacent and abut south and east sides of the property. It should be south and east instead of all. Page 2, Item 10, the last line Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property as commercial should be added and mixed/planned use development. Item 12 should be re-numbered to 11. Page 4 we're requesting some rather significant changes. There was significant discussion about the buffering between Greenhill Estates Subdivision and this development. We would ask that Item 1.10 be revised to read: Applicant shall enter into a license agreement with Ada County Highway District to construct a 3D-foot high buffer - I'm sorry. Okay ~ . Let me start over. 1.10: Applicant shall enter into a license agreement with Ada County Highway District to construct a 3D-foot wide buffer with a 4-foot high. b'erm and a 6-foot high solid, wooden fence on top of the berm along the entire length of Parcel B. That would be the eastern most parcel that has the Ada Couhty Highway District retention pond. As an explanation to that, that portion th'eie 'where the retention pond is shown on that parcel is going to be owned by Ad~.~'_9ounty Highway District. I think all of you are more than familiar with the wa:-y'~"Ada County Highway District maintains those parcels. They're very concerned. about aesthetics and beautiful landscaping. So that is the reason why we asked the applicant to enter into that agreement to make sure that it is landscaped and that they are responsible for the construction of the fence and the appearance of that entire area. I'd like to ask that 1.11 be the next item that would read: Applicant shall construct a minimum 20-foot wide buffer with a 4-foot high berm and a 6-foot high solid, wooden fence on top of the berm along the entire length of Parcel A. Item 1.11 would then become 1.12. 1.12 would become 1.13. We'd ask that the requirement or the staff recommendation for the plat be removed that last sentence and instead of that sentence that the following be added: Applicant shall coordinate with Public Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 46 Works Director and Planning and Zoning Director for direction on appropriate action to accomplish subdivision and/or lot line adjustment. We still need to work on some standards for those lot line adjustments or one-time splits, and I think as part of the standards, we probably won't include a roadway dedication to be permitted as part of a one-time split, but since this is a roadway section that is very much needed and should be included in our Comprehensive Plan, in fact, is something that we need to have done. We may develop some standards for that, but Gary and I can both work with Jonathan to work out the best way for that. Item 1.13 would then become 1. 14. We'd ask that a sentence be added to the end: Applicant shall vacate conflicting easements prior to applying for building permits. The applicant very eloquently made his case at Planning and Zoning Commission for removal of the Development Agreement requirement. They felt it was too restrictive and it tied them down too much to exactly what they're proposing which is kind of the idea of a Development Agreement. If the Development Agreement is not required by the City Council, I would ask that you add an Item 1.15 included as part of the annexation that reads: As a condition of annexation, all uses are to be developed under the conditional use process as a planned development. That way if they make significant changes to their proposal, we'll send them back through the process. Maybe legal counsel has something to say on that. We have in the past included that directly in the Annexation Ordinance that all uses would require to be developed under the conditional use process. On the conditional use portion, Page 4, Item 1.10 of the Recommendations to City Council, staff would support on Line 4, end of the sentence striking "approval" and inserting "building permit issuance." So it would read that the conditional use permit will become null and void if the construction's not complete within two years from the date of the building permit issuance instead of two years from date of approval here which seemed a more reasonable timeframe. Under 1.11, the staffs recommendation that all free- standing and wall signs be included and approved as part of this application. No details have been forthcoming for any of those signs that because, basically, they don't have tenants now, but I think that we should set some restrictions on at least the number and the maximum height of those free-standing signs due to the experience we've had with the Eagle Partners project, we had this same - a similar comment to that signage shall be approved as part of the application. No details were ever submitted, so they've gone through one modification request for 1 aD-foot pole sign, and they're back again with another application for a 77- foot high pole sign. So I think if we could add somewhere within the text of this that free-standing signs are limited to four with a maximum height of ten feet or they can make their case if they want to attempt something else, but I think we need to put some definite limitations on this because we don't want to have to negotiate with every sign that comes through and have to make a judgement call on what a significant change is to their plan. On Page 5, Item 1.15, that could be stricken as they have provided those details. I believe they were presented at Planning and Zoning Commission. Page 6, Item 1.24 should read: A four-foot high berm and six-foot high solid fence is required for the boundaries adjacent to the Greenhill Estates lots. That was covered in the annexation and zoning, but it ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 47 would be good to reiterate it in the conditional use permit. Other than that, we had no further comment. This is a good project. The roadway is needed, and staff recommends approval with the changes noted. Corrie: Okay. Any questions of Shari at this point? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I have one. Shari, you struck a nerve again with that sign deal with me. You said you didn't want to make a judgement call, but then you kind of rolled your eyes and said I'm thinking in the neighborhood of 10-foot, yet we have another application that's on Fairview that you're talking about 20-foot. Have you come up with a Sign Ordinance and these seem very much like judgement calls to me like you're making a judgement. Here it's 10 foot, another it's 20 foot. How do you determine what you're going to allow for height? Stiles: Where was it 20 feet? Anderson: I think it's on the - one of these other projects that we were looking at. The Walgreen I think is a 20-foot sign recommended there. Stiles: No. That was a 72-foot maximum. Albertson's which is way back -- you can't even see the building. The building's higher than 20 feet. It's not along an entryway corridor. You wouldn't even notice a 20-foot high sign back there. The reason I recommend the 20 feet is because directly south of this property, this entire five-acre parcel has restricted itself to a maximum 10-foot high free- standing signs. Every lot in that, they have four or five lots in there, and they have made a commitment as part of their annexation and zoning that they will not exceed that. As a condition of annexation and zoning and the conditional use permit, we could say you can only have two-foot high signs. Anderson: I understand that. I'm just -- Stiles: I would rather- Anderson: -- trying to urge you to - let's get that Sign Ordinance up so you're not making a judgement on all these so that we can push forward with that, and then you've got something to go by. Stiles: I would rather make a legal judgement - I mean that becomes a legal requirement rather than not have any requirement and then have to deal with each one when they come in and make that judgement call and have nothing to stand on. That's why I ask (inaudible). Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 48 Anderson: Okay. Corrie: Any further comments? Bird: I have none. Corrie: This is a public hearing. Any developer? Seel: Good evening, Mayor, Council members. We have read through the report - Corrie: Name. Seel: I'm sorry. Jonathan Seel with W.H. Moore Company, 600 North Steelhead, Boise. We've read through the report, and we have no problems. I don't know if we want to talk about the annexation first or if we want to merge them together. Corrie: Go ahead and do the annexation. Seel: Annexation? Okay. We'll talk about the annexation first. We read through the annexation, the report that you received. We have no problems with that. With respect to the annexation and rezone, recommendations that are included on the letter from Shari, we also have no problems with that. We talked to her about that already. I'm certainly pleased to answer questions you have. We'll try to keep this short. Corrie: Okay. Council? Bird: Which letter are you talking about, Jonathan? Seel: I'm talking about this one that Shari had provided to me this evening which reflects the modifications she just discussed with you. Stiles: They don't have that. Bird: We don't have a copy of it? So we need to enter it into the records? Stiles: The memo was to myself and Jonathan and the City Clerk from Brad Hawkins-Clark, and I went over every one of those items -- Bird: Oh. Okay. Stiles: -- verbally. (' Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 49 Seel: Yeah. We're in agreement with them, so, I was under the understanding you had this. Corrie: Okay. And the request for the conditional use permit? Seel: Okay. You want to do that next, h~h? Corrie: If you're through with - Seel: Yeah. We're through with that. With respect to the conditional use permit, again, reading the report, the recommendations provided to you, we're in agreement with that, and we're in agreement with the conditions, again, that were applied here with, I guess, with exception of a couple things I want to clarify. One, I talked a little bit with Shari about the signage, and I understand where Shari's coming from with her concern for signage. I'm a little reluctant right now to kind of pull something out without understanding what we're going to be potentially developing there. I would like to have the flexibility based on that. If you look at most of our projects throughout the City of Boise, our signage is never - has not been above ten feet. Typically it's been below that. In fact, we've submitted a concept plan reflecting one that was seven feet. But there may be instances where we may need a sign that is slightly higher than that, so I would like to suggest that we have some flexibility in that depending on what we're going to get in there, we had talked about a restaurant. And if it's a restaurant, maybe we will need to look at a little bit higher sign. So I guess I'm just trying to leave that somewhat open at this point to give us the opportunity depending on what we arrive at to determine then instead of locking ourselves into ten feet at this point which mayor may not be, you know, may be acceptable. I don't know. So I'm a little uncomfortable in that. The other thing I')) just mention, I don't know, Shari, if you didn't mention 1.4 on Page 3. I didn't - *** End of Side 3 *** Stiles: -- tonight because I'm not in agreement with changing that. Seel: Okay. Well, I don't know if it's just simply we need clarification on it. I mean, I can explain - my concern about that one, I don't know if you want to (inaudible) rain on your parade here. Stiles: Mr. Seel had a concern because on Page 3, Item 1.4 of the conditional use permit recommendation, it speaks to providing sewer and water to and through the development. I believe that is an ordinance requirement, and I felt it was covered by the remainder of that paragraph that said project designer is to coordinate sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Mr. Seel's concern is that he's going to be required to extend sewer and water to and through his property whether or not it's needed. It's - that's just the wording out of our ordinance. That's the reason it reads the way it is. That's why I thought it r / ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 50 should just stay as it read because the Public Works Department is not going to require him to build lines that are not necessary. Seel: That was my only concern. It was more simply a clarification. If we can tie to sewer on Magic View, and I understand we can. I understand with water we can't. But in the - if, in fact, we can go ahead and tie to sewer on Magic View, I don't want to have language in there that might imply down the road that we need to bring sewer through with what's referred to as St. Luke's Street. As we all know, memories fade, and a year from now or a year-and-a-half from now, somebody looks back and says, oh, Mr. Moore, you were supposed to put sewer down St. Luke's Street. It says it right here, to and through. So I would just like to have some clarification here that if it's necessary, we would put it in, but if it's not necessary that it will not be a requirement. I'm not trying to go against the ordinance because we've had to do the to-and-through policy before. I think it's just clarification because we're talking two streets here with sewer and water right now. That's my only thing. Corrie: But you do agree, Jonathan, that perhaps that last sentence does take that into consideration? Seel: I think it generally does. I guess it doesn't completely satisfy me. You know, I just want it - like I say, I just want something in my mind that's a little clearer on that. As we say, we're talking two streets. We're going to be (inaudible) ACHD is depending. I just don't want that to become an issue, and if it's not necessary and someone down the road decides it, it would be nice to have, but we don't necessarily need it. So maybe I'm being a little picky on this, \ but as I say, we believe memories fade. So anyway, it's a minor thing. I think it's just simply that and the signage are the only two items that I had any comments; otherwise, we're in agreement with this. Corrie: Council, any question of Jonathan? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else that would like to issue testimony on Item 7 the annexation and also the conditional use permit? Yes, sir. Harl: My name is Chuck Harl and I live at 3043 Autumn Way in Meridian. Thank you for your time this evening. I just would like to clarify that I'm a resident in Greenhill Estates, and I would like to clarify a couple of things here. In particular, the berm issue because it becomes a noise, light and privacy issue of separation between this project and our residential subdivision. At the Planning and Zoning meeting, we somehow came up with this four-foot berm on a 35-foot wide piece of right-af-way, and it comes out to a 3:1 ratio, and I'm still confused on how this works. Because even if the 35 feet is split in half, that's 17 feet, and 3: 1 is not four. I - for some reason, I think we can raise this berm for a little bit more or a Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 51 little bit more of a privacy issue is what I'm concerned about here. We talked about before what goes on top of this berm. I'm hearing now that we want a solid six-foot fence that's made out of wood. At the P & Z meeting, we had requested either brick or vinyl, something that doesn't need long-term maintenance. Something that is permanent. This is what we're looking for. I don't think it's really out of the question to do something like this if you look at the maintenance costs that are going to be incurred by having wood on there as to no maintenance on the other things. If we could have some clarification on why exactly this berm is going to only be four-foot high, I would really appreciate that. I guess those are my comments. Corrie: Okay. (inaudible) comments, questions at this point? Thank you. Anyone else that would like to issue testimony? Yes, sir. Foley: My name is Howard Foley. I reside at 2875 Autumn Way in Meridian, Idaho. I'm a resident of Greenhill Estates Subdivision, also, and I have, in addition to Mr. Harl's comments or concerns, two others. I have the same concern that was raised by Shari regarding the sign and Sign Ordinance. Our subdivision has been through this process with Eagle Partners before where the sign's not been designated and we've been back to hearings, and we've had discussions about 1 aD-foot signs and whatever. Now, I understand we're going to be maybe having another hearing about a 72-foot sign, and this seems to be repetitious, and it seems that this is probably the time and the place for these discussions to end so we don't find ourselves back again and again. It seems appropriate to me that if these are going to be office buildings that the signage be consistent with office buildings. That they be ground-level monument signs or that they be signs on the buildings themselves, that they not be free-standing, illuminated signs. Assuming that the offices will be open from eight to five, you know, I'm just not sure we need 10, or as Councilman Anderson asked, 20-foot or whatever they are illuminated signs. I know you've heard from us in our subdivision on too many occasions, but I can assure you we're well illuminated by signage from Jackson's and the Chevron's and the McDonald's in our backyards as it is, and the further that development comes down our backyards, the bigger the concern for us with free-standing, internally illuminated signs - just some definition of what that's going to be and some consistency in terms with the development seems appropriate to us. Certainly, the buildings have to have signage, and we understand that, but we just don't see the need for it to be wide open and then the signage issues that we've had to address before, all of us. Secondly, I think there ought to be a Development Agreement. When I first heard about the project and viewed it, I understand there is a proposal for a restaurant. At one time, I'd heard the proposal was that the restaurant would be internal to the office facility itself, would be one of those things where people who worked inside the office buildings would come and have lunch or whatever the case might be. Now I understand that the developer's not exactly sure what they want. They really don't want to be tied down, understandably, I guess, if you were in our position, we'd like them tied down. We'd like to know what they're ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 52 going to do, we want to know if there's going to be restaurants that extend beyond the eight to five timeframe, and if so, what kind of traffic and lighting, and those kinds of things are going to go on. If that is done by the mechanism of a Development Agreement, many of the applicants that come before you are required to enter into Development Agreements, and that's a safeguard for us through your process, and I'd ask that you pose that on the applicant. Thanks. Corrie: Any questions for Howard? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay. Thank you, Howard. Anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony? Okay. Jonathan, any comments on the questions that were raised? Seel: Yes. Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore Company. I think with respect to the question about the berm and the fence, I think the thinking behind that was that if we have a four-foot berm and a six-foot feet, you basically have ten feet there. I think that would obstruct any type of lighting that would come from the cars. I can appreciate their concern with the noise and lighting, and so I think that was where it was addressed; the fact that we would put a four-foot berm with a six- foot fence on top of it which would give you your ten feet. Presumably, that should be adequate to eliminate the lighting. As far as the sound goes, I'm not sure that you're ever going to completely eliminate noise there, and (inaudible) given the fact that you also have, I don't know how many thousands of cars running up and down Eagle Road every day and every night. So that's where that came from. With respect to the question of the fence, I don't recall - my memory's failed me before, but I don't recall any discussion or approval about a vinyl or brick fence. I do recall some discussions about that, but we would be opposed to that. You start getting into brick, you get into something very substantial in terms of costs. It's not cheap. Winston Moore, I think you're probably all familiar, is a well-respected developer in this community. He's not one that kind of comes in here, throws up a project, sells it and blows out of town. It's in his best interest to maintain this fence, too. We don't want that to deteriorate if we end up, in fact, putting up a wood fence. We want that to look nice. If that starts to deteriorate, then, obvious, that impacts our marketing ability. We want full buildings. So, again, I would like to say that we would (inaudible) wood fence. It would be attractive, it would be well-maintained as well as the landscaping that's in our best interest. As far as the restaurant goes, I would point out that we also say here that we are here for a conditional use permit. In the event that we do come in for a restaurant, we will come back for a CU. So we will come back at that point and there would be conditions put on us. At this point, we don't know what kind of restaurant it is. We don't know what kind of hours of operation. This is a concept. We know generally how it's going to look, but we don't - that's one of the reasons we said to P & Z and we're saying to City Council, that we are prepared to come back in the event it is a ,.- ( ( Meridian City Council January 1812000 Page 53 restaurant and ask for a conditional use permit for that project. So you have essentially another bite of the apple down the road as well as the homeowners who can either say, yes, that's acceptable, or, no, we have a real problem with that. So we are not proposing right now that, yeah, we are going to create a restaurant tomorrow based on this. So I think that's an important point, and I think that's my only comments. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Generally what building you'd be looking at for a restaurant? Seel: Yes. I think most likely if you're looking at it, you'd look at that building right there. (inaudible) Right there. You know, our feeling is that because that is so - that is close to the Chevron Station that that's going to be the most likely place for a restaurant. We also feel that it's far enough away from the homeowners that will not be disruptive to them - certainly minimize any disruptions to them. That is right now what we visualize it as working out that way. I think, again, that would minimize it and it backs up the gas station would be the most likely place. Anderson: Thank you. Seel: Any other questions? deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Mr. Seel, would you be - since you'd have to come back for a CUP if you put a restaurant in that spot to agree to a height on your signs because that sign could be designated with that piece and could come through with a CUP at that point. Seel: Well, again, I would prefer at that point to address the sign on that. Without knowing what type of restaurant it is - deWeerd: Exactly. That's my point. You could commit to a height on the other facilities, but in case that you did have to come back for a CUP on that particular area, you could come back with the sign package at that time as well. Seel: I don't see -- like I say, if you look around at anything that Winston Moore's done, drive up and down Emerald or over Forest River (sic) stuff, you'll see that those signs are monument-type signs that I think are seven, eight feet tall. They're no more than that. They're a brick structure with (inaudible). They ( Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 54 have lights that shine up. They're not internally illuminated. I don't see where that will, personally, where that will be a problem. I think that will go well with an office complex. deWeerd: Would you have a problem putting a ten-foot maximum on signage with the exception if you come back with a CUP on the particular lot. Seel: I don't think so. I think that's reasonable. Again, I understand the homeowners' concerns that they don't want 150-foot sign shining down into the backyard. We can appreciate that; the homeowners' concerns about that. deWeerd: Just one last thing. I know that Shari and her changes had mentioned if we didn't do a Development Agreement there was some other verbiage that she suggested. Do you have a problem with either of those? Seel: No. Because what we presented here is what we think is a concept, the way it will generally look. We've talked about the building, the westerly (inaudible), and I can't remember if that's Parcel A, but the northerly building would be a one-story. Again, we know we're backing up to neighborhoods, so we don't want it to be two-stories. The one below would be potentially a two- story. So we see this as kind of a concept plan that we're going to do, so we're comfortable with trying to stay within these perimeters. I don't see where we're going to erratically deviate. We're not going to throw five buildings on this one and six on that one or something like that. deWeerd: So you wouldn't object to a Development Agreement? Seel: A Development Agreement? Yes, I would. deWeerd: That was part of my question. Okay. Seel: Yeah. That's the whole thing. That's what we argued with before was that we don't want to get locked in, quite honestly, if we are forced for that, then, you know, we don't know at this point what precisely we're going to do, and if you get into Development Agreements, they're a very specific thing. You have a concept here, and I don't know if we - we don't - we're opposed to that. deWeerd: That's alii had. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Seel: Okay. Thank you very much. (" Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 55 Corrie: Any other questions or any other testimony you would like to hear, Council? Bird: I have none. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor, just for staff. Shari, since I didn't write every change down that you had suggested, in regards to the Development Agreement versus the other alternative, what are the differences between those two? Stiles: Well, a Development Agreement will definitely lock them into exactly what they proposed, what they've shown. I saw Mr. Gigray over there shaking his head when I was talking about just making it a part of the annexation that all uses had to be developed under the conditional use permit process as a planned development. I think that we can do it that way. I think it can be included in the Annexation Ordinance that that's a condition. It's just as easy, in fact, probably easier to track than a Development Agreement; less staff intensive. I'm sure Mr. Gigray wouldn't mind getting rid of some Development Agreements whenever he has the opportunity. I think we have the same control by going with the conditional use permit process as we would through a Development Agreement with a lot fewer trees killed. deWeerd: Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: With that, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on Item No. 7 and Item NO.8. Bird: So moved. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Item No.7, request for annexation and zoning, and Item No.8, request for conditional use permit. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES. Corrie: Okay, Council. Let's take then one at a time. Item No.7. Mr. Gigray. Gigray: I would advise the Council that it would be my legal opinion that regarding Development Agreements that you can use them to craft conditions of development as well as conditions of use. You don't have to include both. They Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 56 can include one or the other. I do not recommend that you have an Annexation and a Zoning Ordinance that has conditions in the Zoning Ordinance because I do not feel that there is clear statutory authority allowing that. I think the vehicle which the Land Use Planning Act provides as a Development Agreement is a condition of a rezone or a zoning designation, and that's why we've used those. Now, if your ordinance which is proposed on this annexation requires a conditional use permit in an L-O zone for what they proposed to do, then that would take care of itself under the Zoning Ordinance. If it doesn't require a conditional use permit, then if there's part of this that wouldn't be governed by the conditional use permit, then the zoning without a Development Agreement wouldn't control it. They would be able to do what the zone would allow. Corrie: Any discussion? Bird: I think Shari's got something to say. Corrie: Shari. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I need to address what Bill just said. If I'm hearing you right, you're saying that you can't include in an Annexation Ordinance that as a condition of annexation, all uses shall be developed as conditional uses, and that under the conditional use permit process as a planned development. You can't do that? Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, no. We can write it that way, I just don't recommend that. I don't think that there's clear statutory authority. I think you have an Annexation Ordinance that includes property, an annexation and then we're required as soon as possible to zone it, and that Annexation Ordinance includes a designation of the property in a zone. We have an ordinance that prescribes what you can use property for in a particular zone. We can't rewrite that Zoning Ordinance in an Annexation Ordinance, and I wouldn't recommend that we try to do so, and I think that's the idea of Development Agreements and why the statutes allow us to use them so that through the Development Agreement as a condition of that zoning you can further limit the use of the property and/or the development of the property in that agreement. Now, if, for instance, the annexation were to the L-Q zone and the L-Q zone had requirements in it that this developer, whatever that is they wanted to do, required a conditional use permit by the terms of the L-Q zone, then what you've recommended works under the terms of our own Zoning Ordinance. If that doesn't work, if then - if you have an annexation into an L-O zone, then they can, without a Development Agreement, then they would be able to develop the property subject to whatever uses are permitted in that zone. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 57 Bird: This is for Mr. Gigray. But if we, in approving the annexation and zoning to an L-O, require that all buildings come under conditional use permit, then that takes - they can't (inaudible) go back on that, can they? That takes place of the Development Agreement? Gigray: I'll be directed to draft the ordinance as you require. I just don't recommend that because I think then you get into issues of conditional zoning, but by specific ordinances, you have an ordinance that prescribes your zoning regulations, and you can't amend that by various annexations. You have to go back and change the whole ordinance. But you can, in the Idaho Land Use Planning Act specifically gives you authority if you choose to exercise it, to govern and restrict as a condition of the zoning, the use and/or the development of the property. You don't have to do both. You can just do one. Or you could do both, depending on how you see the evidence in the particular case and what's reasonable. But if you started annexing property and zoning it subject to conditions, we'd have a bunch of mini-zoning ordinances all over the place with every annexation, and I just don't see in the Idaho Code clear authority to do that. But if you direct me to draft the ordinance, I have to do what I'm directed to do by the governing body which you are. Corrie: Okay. It looks like you've got two choices. Annexation and zoning with the Development Agreement or with the conditional use permit on the zoning. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: May I ask Shari - Shari, if I recall, I don't believe it's probably been the two years I've been on here, but I believe we've done a lot of annexations and zonings with conditional use permits, have we not, instead of Development Agreements? Stiles: Most of them ended up requiring a Development Agreement. Practically everything that's been annexed since 1994 has a condition that they enter into a Development Agreement. Bird: Okay. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I guess I just have a general question, then. This seems like a development that we're not the only city that has these types of developments where we don't actually know who the tenants are going to be at this point. How are those other cities dealing with this same type of issue? Are they requiring Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 58 Development Agreements or are we - is our ordinance restricting us or do we need to look at that? I'm not - anybody that can answer it, I guess. Bird: I'm with Councilman Anderson. I'd like to know, too. Corrie: Shari, any idea? Stiles: I believe Star is getting into requiring Development Agreements, Eagle is way different and does require some Development Agreements, but they also have very restrictive design review guidelines. Boise City has a lot of zones that are design review. They have Design Review Committees which helps them a lot, but when you are just trying to do it with Planning and Zoning and Council and staff, it gets down to design review of practically every project that comes through the door. That's why we put the Development Agreement requirement on them because we may have conditions that aren't necessarily outlined in the existing ordinance that is sometimes a lot of it's site-specific, too. Depending on where it is, what the surrounding uses are, some of their presentations they may make during the public hearings that they may say they're going to do that, but if you can really tie them down with a Development Agreement, it's easier to enforce, but I don't know how many Development Agreements Boise City has done. I know that they do have the mechanism for them, but I believe, and maybe Jonathan can even answer that, too. It's governed more by design review in those other cities. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: It seems that you h"ave a little bit more control, a little bit more chance of feedback with a conditional use permit, though. At least you can see what they're proposing. If it's just under a Development Agreement, you don't see it, if it's permitted. Corrie: Shari. Stiles: I don't particularly like the way Development Agreements are turning out as far as - I mean, they are extremely restrictive. It says - it has - it's 50 pages long, it has the Findings attached to it, it has an exact site plan that sometimes is so restrictive that it doesn't leave them any room for even slight modifications because of the way that it's written. deWeerd: So it's almost better off that they come in and ask for annexation and zoning without a plan. I've seen that happen. So why on earth do we allow that to happen and don't put any conditional use permit requirements on but we're holding - we're considering holding this one up because the CUP process is not the way to go? (' Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 59 Corrie: I don't think it's not a way to go. It's just one of the ways. Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, the only time that you have authority to require a conditional use permit is if the applicant is in a zone and they propose a use of that property that that Zoning Ordinance requires a conditional use permit. They've already been annexed, they're already subject to a Zoning Ordinance that applies to that property, and they propose to, let's say, put a gas station in an L-Q zone, and in order to use that as a gas station, takes a conditional use permit. Then you go through and they go through the conditional use permit. But if the L-Q zone allows an office building, they don't need a conditional use permit because the zone allows an office building. Now, if in a Development Agreement, you require as a condition of giving the L-O zone to the applicant that they go through a conditional use permit in order to get the office building, you need a Development Agreement in my opinion. That's an example. Obviously, in this application, one of these would be subject to a conditional use permit, but I'm saying do not pass annexation ordinances with zoning designations that include conditions on the zone because I don't think you have clear, legal authority to do that. You have your zoning ordinance, and once you're designated in that zone, it's subject to the terms and conditions of that zone whatever they may be. Now, if you want to limit that further, then you do a Development Agreement. Whether or not you do that is a matter of discretion and determination. Yes, you could accommodate an application for annexation and zoning and no development, and if you feel in your wisdom that's proper, you'd grant the annexation and zoning with no conditions. You know, those are going to be fact-driven by each application. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Mr. Gigray, so can you request that a Development Agreement be made but not particularly tying to that and ask for them to come through with conditional use permits with their - Gigray: You could have a Development Agreement simply just governed the use, and it'd have a provision in there that any uses proposed of the property or any development of the property would require a conditional use process and of conditions. Corrie: Any further discussion? deWeerd: Well, Mr. Mayor, I guess some of the change in this, I would be interested to hear what the applicant had to say. Corrie: We can't do it. It's a public hearing. Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 60 deWeerd: That would be my proposal. I would move that we re-open the public hearing. Bird: ('II second it. Corrie: Motion's made and seconded to re-open the public hearing on Item No. 7 and 8. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: All right. Let's hear what you've got to say, Jonathan. . Seel: I think there's a couple things to think about here. This kind of caught me flatfooted because I didn't think we'd be going through this again. The City needs the road and County wants to put it in, and Winston Moore - let me back up. The process behind us was Winston wanted to, about six months ago, wanted to get an idea how this road would be laid out. He went to ACHD and said to them, we'd like to know how much right-of-way you'll be taking and how's this going to be used so we can begin to design a concept plan on this project so we can begin to market it. ACHD's comment at that point was, okay, you go ahead and submit an application, and based on that, we'll be able to determine what kind of road we put. Based on that, we came up with a concept plan is what we're proposing here which we don't see is going to radically deviate from this. This is an L-O zone, we are allowed to put office in here. With multiple office, we go through the conditional use. So we submitted this concept plan without knowing precisely how this is all going to work out because we haven't started the marketing process yet, and we don't know how market conditions are going to dictate for this. So we have a concept plan here. I don't want to say this as a threat, but this is almost verbatim from Winston, is if the City of Meridian requires me to do a Development Agreement that's very specific, then I'll simply pull the application. He doesn't want to get locked into something because we don't know. As Shari's said, we've gone through this before where it gets so specific is the type of building, the size, the footprint and everything else, and we begin to deviate from that, we're back here, and we don't want to do that. That's just counterproductive. I don't think you enjoy listening to me talk, and I certainly don't want to be here until 11 :00 multiple times. I'm not trying to be smart here, I'm just trying to lay it out. What we're trying to do is say, okay, this is generally what we're going to do. It's an L-Q zone. The homeowners, from what I understand, and Billy Ray is probably spent many meetings here with homeowners and their concerns, they wanted office, we're proposing office with a possibility of a restaurant which we will come back under a conditional use permit to provide. So we're not really talking about a restaurant today. The restaurant is for all intents and purposes in my mind off the table. We're just saying that there's just a possibility down the road, we're kind of laying out. Maybe it'd be better if we never had. So we're trying to give you a concept plan, but we don't know if this is specific. If we get a particular type of tenants or Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 62 something like that with some latitude in there, you know, we're not proposing gas stations or any of the other things. We're basically talking office here, and we will say office, and we said that at the P & Z with the possibility of a restaurant of a conditional use. We will not come back here and ask anyone else here for - oh, we changed our mind, and we'd like to put a Shell Gas Station on that corner. We'd like to put a retail complex. We won't and we said that at P & Z. I think we're trying to be fairly specific and give everybody the comfort they need. (inaudible) answers questions. Kind of in a nutshell. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Thank you, Jonathan. I think you answered the question. Anderson: Mr. Foley wants to comment. Corrie: If somebody opens it up, comment (inaudible) Howard. Foley: I'm Howard Foley. From my perspective, I don't represent the homeowners either, but I just represent myself. I'm not opposed to a general, loosely-written Development Agreement. My concern is the lack of specifics as to what mayor may not go in there that isn't office building. That's my concern, and I want the staff or the City to continue to have some control over it. I understand legal counsel to say is if you just annex it L-O, you're done. No other conditions. You can't put conditions on it that are other than limited office. If it's limited office, it's just a limited office. Restaurants aren't limited offices. That's my only concern that they're continuing to be some kind of control. If we had the Design Review, then that would be some further control. We just don't have it. So that seems to me, and I think that would be acceptable to me as a resident, if we had a Development Agreement that simply said, if you're going to do something beyond limited office or those kinds of things that you go through something that's akin to the conditional use permit or something that gives us notice and opportunity to come in and talk with staff and say, gee, these are the concerns that we have. That's really my concern, and we have given what I understand Mr. Seel to have said if that's acceptable to the applicant. I think that would be acceptable to us, also, but, you know, we've had these issues before where we think we know what's going on, and then it's sort of gets a life of its own and it sort of changes. Then we are back here lots and lots, and I don't want to do this anymore either. So, that's my only concern. Corrie: Thank you, Howard. Is that what you were saying, Jonathan? Seel: I think (inaudible) 30 seconds because I think we have gone through this. I think that's all we're really saying here. We will put a:n office here. We will put in there we will be very specific. It's not going to be a 'ga's station, it's not going to ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 63 be retail, it's not going to be a liquor store, whatever it is. It's going to be office here. What type of office? It could be medical, it could be general, but it will be office. Then, if we do come with a restaurant, we'll come back with a conditional use permit, again, you've got that second bite at the apple. So I think we're all in agreement here. You know, I think we could accept that. Corrie: Thank you. Okay. Council, have you heard what you wanted to hear? .Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we close the public hearing. Bird: I second it. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing on Items 7 and 8. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Okay. Are you ready then for your Item No. 7 on the annexation and zoning? Anderson: Go ahead, Tammy. It was your idea. Go ahead and take a stab at it. deWeerd: I knew- Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Oh. I'm sorry. Then, Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we have a Findings of Facts and Decision of Order for the request for annexation and zoning of 1 0 acres from R- T to L-Q for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company, Eagle Road and Magic View, and that the Development Agreement be a very loose - very general L-Q Development Agreement and anything outside of light office will come for a CUP. Anderson: Second. deWeerd: Mr. Bird, would that include - Corrie: Just a second. Motion is made and seconded. Okay. Now discussion, Mrs. deWeerd. , \ ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 64 deWeerd: That needs to include staff comments- Bird: It includes staff comments -- deWeerd: -- and would you include- Bird: -- and Development Agreement. deWeerd: -- anything on the signage? Bird: The signage is in the staff comments. deWeerd: Oh. Did you put in there height restriction on this? Bird: Ten foot, yeah. Stiles: It's just a suggestion. Bird: We don't have an ordinance. Anderson: Wouldn't that be covered under the CUP? deWeerd: If they come back for a CUP. Corrie: All right. Any other discussion? Gigray: Point of clarification. Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, is the motion with the inclusion of staff comments as the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission as proposed to be amended by staff and staffs comments here today? Bird: Yes, it is. Gigray: Okay. Corrie: Is that agreeable on the second? Anderson: Yes. Corrie: Okay. Any other discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. ( Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 65 MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Now we have a public hearing request on the conditional use permit, Item NO.8. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the conditional use permit to provide multiple buildings on a single site and an ancillary restaurant in an L-O zone for proposed Magic View Office Complex by W.H. Moore Company, Eagle Road and Magic View, and that is to include the staff comments which I'm not going through and outline and for the City Attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Decision of Order. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion is made and seconded to approve the conditional use permit on Item No. 8 and the attorney to draw up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and the Order. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: That would have a condition that if they do put a restaurant in here they will come back with the CUP; correct? Corrie: That's part of the conditional use. deWeerd: Just wanted clarification. Corrie: Thank you. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Now, given the hour, it's 11 :00 and we had a lot of people that was here to do the Walgreen's on 9 and 10. I would recommend to the Council, it's your decision, that we have that on the 1 st on the public hearing continued to the next meeting. Bird: Yeah. We've had I'll bet you four, five, six, seven people leave because we told them - they were under the impression that we weren't going to go. There's some sitting back out there, but there were four or five sitting right - ( t ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 66 Gigray: (inaudible) Bird: Is there anybody that can't come back, Mayor, (inaudible) 18t? Corrie: Is there anybody that can't come back on the 18t of February? We can take - Hawker: Mr. Mayor, Colby Hawker, Hawkins Smith - if we - Corrie: It's not open yet. Let me - I just wanted to know if - the reason you can't. Hawker: I'm with the applicant, and our issue is simply with we have made a commitment on the property, and we have got to finalize where we are in this project or our commitments on this thing - we started - we applied in August, we were deferred through Planning and Zoning, we were deferred through ACHD, and it just keeps going on and on and on, and I know the timing was bad with the first of the year and the new City Council members that have come on for the last hearing that we were supposed to be on. So- Corrie: One of the things, if I open it, it'll have to be continued to the first, so it'll be the same thing because we've got people that left that have a right to testify. Hawker: Well, I understand. I don't know what to say other than (inaudible) specific commitments that we have got to make and I would just hate to have that go - I think we have a plan in front of the City Council that we can talk about tonight. I know there are several neighbors that had some concerns, and I think we've got a plan that we will present to you that will alleviate the concerns that they had. Corrie: That may well be, but they're not here. Hawker: Well (inaudible) - Corrie: So that's why we have to have the continued public hearing. You're in a Catch-22 here. Some people have left because of the hour. Hawker: I understand. Bird: Mr. Mayor, can I explain something? The Mayor asked earlier if there was anybody here that, you know, -- told them that if it comes 10:30, we were going to decide on these two things to go, and then at that point, five or six people left. It would not be fair to them, and I understand your dilemma, you know, and I realize you've went on about six months trying to get this thing through, but it's ( ( Meridian City Council January 1812000 Page 67 not fair to those people that were under the impression that we were not going to have a public hearing. - *** End of Side 4 *** Item 9. Public Hearing: Annexation and zoning of 4.34 acres from C-2 and R-8 to C-G (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove: Item 1 O. Public Hearing: Conditional use permit to construct a single- tenant commercial building with a drive-thru window (Walgreen's) by Hawkins Smith Management, Inc. - NW corner of Fairview and Locust Grove: Hawker: -- I understand that. Bird: I understand your dilemma. Hawker: It's an unfortunate situation, I guess. We've just been involved with this process for so long, and our commitments that we can make to the landowners out there - you know, the property that we're taking down as part of this, there's a huge financial commitment that we have to make to go ahead and close on those pieces of property, and without knowing that my development is approved as part of this, there's a huge financial risk that I take there. Bird: When do you have to make the commitment? Hawker: Well, our commitments have to be made by the end of this month. Bird: By the first of February? You couldn't get a 15-day extension on those guys? I don't think somebody's going to jump in and buy it up (inaudible) Hawker: I don't know. (inaudible) approach them and make that recommendation. That's my concern. Bird: And I apologize for the - you know, we can only go so much - Corrie: The thing is, you wouldn't get a commitment from the Council anyway until they voted the 1st if they had it tonight. So you're still in a Catch-22. They have to approve the Findings of Facts on the 1St, so you're not in time anyway. Hawker: Sure. I understand. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. ( , Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 68 Anderson: In light of that and the hour, I would make a motion that we table the two public hearings on Items 9 and 10 until the 1 st of February's meeting. Bird: Don't you mean continue the public hearing? Corrie: We'll need to continue - Anderson: Continue the public hearing. Corrie: It'll (inaudible) public hearing (inaudible) -- Anderson: Did we even open it? Bird: Yeah, but he's up there testifying. Gigray: You should just open it and then continue it (inaudible discussion) Anderson: So the correct motion would be a motion to continue the public hearing until February 1 st. Bird: Second. deWeerd: It still needs to be opened first Doesn't it need to be opened to continue it? Corrie: It will be opened - continue the public hearing, it will be opened on February the 1st due to the hour. Okay. A motion has been made and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Then the public hearing will be on February the 1 st on Items No. 9 and 10. (inaudible discussion) Item 11. Request for hookup to city water and sewer on properties located on Lots 13A and 138 in Van Heas Subdivision by Randy Ware - on Linder Road approximately % mile south of Franklin Road: Corrie: Item No. 11 is request for hookup to city water and sewer on properties located on Lots 13A and 138 in the Van Hees Subdivision on Linder Road approximately % mile south of Franklin Road. Okay. Shari, staff, this was a - Gary. { \. / Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 69 Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, I received a transmittal from City Clerk Berg concerning this request. This property is located on the west side of Linder Road approximately across the street from I think it was the last addition of the Landing Subdivision. It appears from our zoning map it's contiguous, its frontage on Linder Road is contiguous to what was previously annexed as part of the Landing Subdivision, I think, No.7, which is the southerly most piece. My recommendation is that the property be annexed as part of the approval to connect to city water and sewer which does exist in Linder Road. I think that's all I have to say. Corrie: Thank you. (inaudible) comments? Bird: Do you want an annexation and everything in this, Gary? Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, Councilman Bird, I think that unless it's part of the approval, that property will not be annexed. It'll remain as County property and we'll just have an enclave that will continue on in that area as the - Corrie: They're not requesting annexation, are they? Smith: No, sir. The request was just to connect to city sewer and water. Corrie: If there's no incentive to (inaudible) Mr. Bird. Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Point of information for the Mayor and Council and maybe the Public Works Director can answer this. You have with your packet Ordinance No. 852 which the Council passed which is certain requirements that have to be met in order for property to connect the water system outside of the city limits as well as the sewer system, and it doesn't look to me as if the application which is here submitted by Mr. Ware meets the requirements of that ordinance which is that in the application that they would consent to the te(ms and conditions required by these sections, and then that initiates a process where the Public Works Director does an analysis about the affect of this hooking up on the system. One of the things they have to agree to is the Council grants the application, it will include as a condition that the legal owners of the parcel will enter into an agreement for the extension of the water. In the case of the sewer, the sewer which provides that they will agree that the ordinances apply and that it will be, in fact, if it's annexable, that they will agree to the annexation. I don't see this letter including - maybe Mr. Ware is here and can further clarify that, but it just doesn't seem like it meets the requirements of the ordinance. Corrie: Is that you? Ware: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Randy Ware, I live at 1 0464 Shady Brooke in Boise. I talked to Mr. Smith earlier today about the application, and, apparently, there isn't - hasn't been one made up yet. (--- 1 Meridian City Council January 18,2000 Page 70 Smith: Correct. Ware: So I would like to state for the record though, that I do agree to the terms and conditions of what is in this ordinance as far as anything - annexing into the city limits and any of the other things that are in here. Basically, the application - the ordinance - the application basically addresses items A, B, C, D, E and F which are, in my opinion, only a formality which basically states that I will agree to the terms and conditions of the agreement that we put together. All I'm trying to do is hook up to city sewer and water out there on a couple of lots, and I think that this ordinance allows for that, but the fact that there is no application shouldn't penalize me from doing that. This ordinance went into effect December 7th and was in full force January 7th. You know, I'm ready to go with it, but it's not my fault that there isn't an application for me to fill out. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Mr. Gigray, if this were to be approved, the request, can conditions be placed that he follow up with the application for annexation and zoning? Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council and Councilperson deWeerd, we do have form agreements that match these requirements for property owners to sign, and then we record them. I might note that when you remember that a water and sewer system has - there are many ordinances in place that protect your water and sewer system, and if properties located outside of the city limits, those ordinances don't apply. But what we do with the agreement is include those as a condition of providing water and sewer so that they do apply to the system and the delivery of the water and the sewer so that you protect your sewer system against overloads and things that can happen that can cause problems, and you can enforce it. Secondly, the agreement requires that if the property is annexable, quite frankly, it's an agreement to be annexed if it's legally possible, and in this instance, if it abuts the property, you could proceed to annexation even because it's considered their consent. I think what Gary is requesting in this instance that they would make an application for annexation which I think requires a filing fee of some kind and they would initiate that application rather than the City initiating it on its own. That's how I understand Gary's comment. That could be included in the order if you choose to do that. But I would say, I think these issues are important particularly what I see on the horizon of potential legislation that might require votes for annexation of properties where the property owner is not in favor of it and if there's a reason to - if we're supplying water and sewer, I think you would want to do what you could to assure that that consent has already been given, and that's what this is designed to require. It sounds like with the applicant's testimony here today, on I Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 69 Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, I received a transmittal from City Clerk Berg concerning this request. This property is located on the west side of Linder Road approximately across the street from I think it was the last addition of the Landing Subdivision. It appears from our zoning map it's contiguous, its frontage on Linder Road is contiguous to what was previously annexed as part of the Landing Subdivision, I think, No.7, which is the southerly most piece. My recommendation is that the property be annexed as part of the approval to connect to city water and sewer which does exist in Linder Road. I think that's all I have to say. Corrie: Thank you. (inaudible) comments? Bird: Do you want an annexation and everything in this, Gary? Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, Councilman Bird, I think that unless it's part of the approval, that property will not be annexed. It'll remain as County property and we'll just have an enclave that will continue on in that area as the - Corrie: They're not requesting annexation, are they? Smith: No, sir. The request was just to connect to city sewer and water. Corrie: If there's no incentive to (inaudible) Mr. Bird. Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Point of information for the Mayor and Council and maybe the Public Works Director can answer this. You have with your packet Ordinance No. 852 which the Council passed which is certain requirements that have to be met in order for property to connect the water system outside of the city limits as well as the sewer system, and it doesn't look to me as if the application which is here submitted by Mr. Ware meets the requirements of that ordinance which is that in the application that they would consent to the terms and conditions required by these sections, and then th~t initiates a process where the Public Works Director does an analysis about the affect of this hooking up on the system. One of the things they have to agree to is the Council grants the application, it will include as a condition that the legal owners of the parcel will enter into an agreement for the extension of the water. In the case of the sewer, the sewer which provides that they will agree that the ordinances apply and that it will be, in fact, if it's annexable, that they will agree to the annexation. I don't see this letter including - maybe Mr. Ware is here and can further clarify that, but it just doesn't seem like it meets the requirements of the ordinance. Corrie: Is that you? Ware: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Randy Ware, I live at 1 0464 Shady Brooke in Boise. I talked to Mr. Smith earlier today about the application, and, apparently, there isn't - hasn't been one made up yet. (" ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 70 Smith: Correct. Ware: So I would like to state for the record though, that I do agree to the terms and conditions of what is in this ordinance as far as anything - annexing into the city limits and any of the other things that are in here. Basically, the application - the ordinance - the application basically addresses items A, B, C, 0, E and F which are, in my opinion, only a formality which basically states that I will agree to the terms and conditions of the agreement that we put together. All I'm trying to do is hook up to city sewer and water out there on a couple of lots, and I think that this ordinance allows for that, but the fact that there is no application shouldn't penalize me from doing that. This ordinance went into effect December 7th and was in full force January 7th, You know, I'm ready to go with it, but it's not my fault that there isn't an application for me to fill out. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Mr. Gigray, if this were to be approved, the request, can conditions be placed that he follow up with the application for annexation and zoning? Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council and Councilperson deWeerd, we do have form agreements that match these requirements for property owners to sign, and then we record them. I might note that when you remember that a water and sewer system has - there are many ordinances in place that protect your water and sewer system, and if properties located outside of the city limits, those ordinances don't apply. But what we do with the agreement is include those as a condition of providing water and sewer so that they do apply to the system and the delivery of the water and the sewer so that you protect your sewer system against overloads and things that can happen that can cause problems, and you can enforce it. Secondly, the agreement requires that if the property is annexable, quite frankly, it's an agreement to be annexed if it's legally possible, and in this instance, if it abuts the property, you could proceed to annexation even because it's considered their consent. I think what Gary is requesting in this instance that they would make an application for annexation which I think requires a filing fee of some kind and they would initiate that application rather than the City initiating it on its own. That's how I understand Gary's comment. That could be included in the order if you choose to do that. But I would say, I think these issues are important particularly what I see on the horizon of potential legislation that might require votes for annexation of properties where the property owner is not in favor of it and if there's a reason to - if we're supplying water and sewer, I think you would want to do what you could to assure that that consent has already been given, and that's what this is designed to require. It sounds like with the applicant's testimony here today, on ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 71 the record, that he is - we have something in the record that says he will agree to that. Corrie: Okay. Any comments, questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Gary. Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, we do have an agreement for connection of property outside the city limits; I think that's what Bill's referring to. It does include a provision for annexation. We do not have an application that is outlined in this ordinance. I have not developed that application yet. That's what I related to Mr. Ware today on the telephone, but as Bill points out, it's my recommendation that the property be annexed as part of the provision to provide or for them to connect, and Mr. Ware's agreeing to that. I would assume that he would be agreeable to sign this - at least review and enter into the agreement that we have for provision of providing of service outside - for property outside the city limits, presently outside the city limits. Ware: Mayor, members of the Council, I would agree to that. I do have a request, though, that while this process of annexation is taking place that I be allowed to go ahead and begin the hook-up process that is involved. Timing- wise it would be much more beneficial. Bird: (inaudible) with that. Corrie: Could be done (inaudible) Council wants to do it. Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, I mentioned to Randy on the phone today that I don't have a problem with that proposal as long as the process continues on. If the process stalls for any reason and it goes away, then so will the connection. We will eliminate the connection. Corrie: You have no problem with that? Ware: No problem with that. Smith: Okay. Anderson: (inaudible) Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I wanted to intervene here just so Gary could comment. My recommendation would be that in the agreement and the order we would make a requirement that he make application for annexation and zoning into the city, and, of course, would not impede that process. The city would not pre-commit itself on an issue like that because it's quasi-judicial by /'-- ( I \ Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 72 saying the service would be disconnected. I think that once that process gets started, it will complete itself on its own, and as long as we have a provision in there that the property owner wouldn't impede that process, I think that could protect us as long as Gary's comfortable with that. See, my point is that, you know, we still have to have a fair and impartial decision maker at some point on the annexation and zoning, and I just want to protect that on the one side in this. As long as if he turns around and sells and we have a provision in the agreement that they won't impede that process, it can move forward anyway. Corrie: Mr. Smith. Smith: Okay with me. Corrie: All right. Then I will entertain a motion to that effect. Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I'll take a stab at this. I would make a motion that we allow Mr. Randy Ware to hook up to city water and sewer on properties located on Lots 13A and 13B in the Van Hees Subdivision on Linder Road providing that he make application to the City for annexation and zoning and does not impede that progress. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion made by Mr. Anderson, seconded by Mr. Bird to approve the hook-up to city water and sewer with agreement that they make the application to the city annexation and zoning without impeding the process of the water and sewer. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES 12. Department Reports: A. City Treasurer - Janice Smith: 1. Treasurer's Report: Corrie: Department Reports. Treasurer, is Janice still here? Smith: Mayor and Council, Ron was asking earlier in the evening about the variance that we had, and I pulled out my notebook, a copy that was given to them in December and that shows a variance. On the white page, it also gives you some past history also. But for the report tonight, I also typed up something in case you forgot what I, you know, as it's been a long night and everything, and you might have some questions later. What I wanted to go over tonight quickly was the summary that you got this month was a little bit different format because I i \ Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 73 we updated our software which they do at a regular basis, and they lost our summary (inaudible) fund, so we just did it in Excel. It just looks a little bit different than normal. We should have it fixed by the end of the week. Okay. Another change on Number 2 there, the Idaho Power Utility expenses on all the funds are not in there because Idaho Power is doing some changing to, I guess, like the City of Meridian on their utility billing. Anyway, if you looked in your summary on your Page 9 in the general, it's like $10,000 short because of the utility billing. Page 2 and 4 of the Enterprise Fund, it's short a couple thousand, too. So we will be getting with Idaho Power to find out if this is going to be happening on a regular basis. We may have to at year-end make an adjustment or request them to do some changes on their billing for the City for the cut-off date. We'll get with the department heads. I'm sure that they have notices - will be noticing it to let them know, the heads, up on what Idaho Power's going to do for us. Then you'll notice on the revenue, on the summary - do you guys happen to have your statement in front of you? Looks like this. Okay. You'll notice that the revenues are getting pretty low here. Our expenses are exceeding our revenues. We do have some money in the bank. This is normal for this time of the year. We'll be getting our tax dollars at the end of this month or the first part of February. We may have to pull some money out of the investments to cover January's payroll. If you'll notice on the - with the Fire Department, with their expenses and then also with the Enterprise when you go back to your Enterprise, you'll see they're spending a lot on their projects, their capital projects that they're working on. So by the end of this week, we'll have some figures, and then we have an investment committee that the Mayor was on, City Clerk, myself, and it was Charlie Rountree. I'm not sure who you appointed to take his place. Keith? Okay. So we'll have to get together and decide if we're going to have to pull some out of investments. We haven't had to do this since 1993. We've been operating really good, but we've been spending money the last few years with the Fire Department getting - last year also with everybody getting up their hardware for the Y2K which is this fiscal year, October through December we did a lot of that. In your packet you didn't receive the investment report. That's because we haven't received the Treasurer's Department - the State Treasury's Report. They were behind a month also. So as soon as we get that, you'll get an investment report. I thought I brought a copy in here of what we had in there. Just a second. Last month there was 30 million in there. But you'll get that breakdown on that at the end of this month. Before then. It should be within a few days. Okay. On Issue No.5, the County Department has completed their part, our part on the 1999 audit. The auditors are waiting for the Council members' decision on Resolution 140. I think that was brought up a couple times and it hasn't been addressed in the last few years. The way we see it, Resolution 140 was binding on - I think you guys need to have an actual workshop on this, discuss it in further detail instead of trying to make any decision on it tonight. When you decide on that, they said they'd get us the rough draft of the audits. Then I usually go over the rough draft for any corrections, could be verbiage or some dollar figure, and that should be within a couple days, and they hope to have it in your hands by the end of this month. I ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 74 know it says in the ordinance, there is an ordinance that puts my department on the line, it should be done, can't remember right off hand. I did pull it out, but it should be done before now. There were some issues that they went over the latecomers with a fine-tooth comb this year, and we've got that pretty well done with the Bill Nichols here, with his help, and the City Engineer, I think we've got it fine-tuned. That won't have to be brought up again. We did - they appropriated so much money for the latecomers, so that wasn't an issue, but it was an issue up to the end of December. Between Bill and the Engineering Department, we agreed on a figure~ So I guess if you have any questions on the audit, check with our auditors. That would be Kevin Anderson. If you guys want to push them, just skip that 140, they can get that rough draft over to me. They already gave me one rough draft, and I had some corrections, sent it back. So other than that, if you guys want to pursue it, get it done now and forget Resolution 140, but it hasn't - on the last two years, they haven't addressed that. Bird: Excuse me, Mr. Mayor. Janice, Resolution 140, what does that do with the P & L of the City? Why does that hold up the audit? You either - what you do with the excess money - I want to know how much excess money I've got. That's what the audit does; it tells us how we ran, how much we had left over. Resolution 140 tells us what we do with it. Smith: Right. And- Bird: To make the audit, I can't'see where that had a thing to do with Resolution 140. Smith: Well, if you looked in prior audits, it was addressed as the reserve - it was as excess fund revenue. When Blucoff (sic) has taken over, they didn't even address it, and they noticed an error this year. The wordage, whether it be excess funds from the building fund or general, it's - to me it's one in the same. It's just wordage. Here you've got one wordage here and usually every city has excess - if they have excess revenue, they will decide at the end of the year or the beginning of the next year, and a Resolution can override another Resolution. Bird: Janice, I agree with you, but what gets me is I don't have a thing to do with the audit of what you do. Smith: Bill has some input on that. Bill Gigray - I've had - he's been helping me with this. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, the only thing I can understand, I don't know specifically to answer your question, I would summarize or surmise that it's probably would be a comment usually the audits have comments in them about things that need to be done and what their recommendations are, and they would probably list Resolution 140 and the matters related to that as a comment for proposed future action. You'd have to check with them, but that'd be my Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 75 guess. I guess maybe if they thought action was going to be taken on that, they would delete that as a comment. But I don't know for sure. That'd be my guess. Bird: I just have a hard time figuring out why the - I mean, this is the first year we've ever used anything other than revenue and taxation and stuff, and we took that money out of the - two million out of the fund balance, so what we've got left over, I mean, you know, in the private world, man, you know, that's what you look for is what's left over at the end of the year. That's your problem. So why is a Resolution holding up a whole lot? That I don't understand. Smith: Well, the way we see it worded in the Accounting Department, it says all excess funds need to - would go into the building reserve fund, but then you have some restricted funds which, of course, are the park impact fees, we know those are restricted, and also the fire truck funds. But then, also, the Parks Department has capital projects that they - that he doesn't spend, and those should go to that building reserve fund, but then he also wants to take that and re-budget it which he has done on some, but when it's put into the building reserve fund, it's there. It's not - just because some of the Department Heads think that since they didn't spend it, well, I still have this from last year. I can spend it again. But it's not. It has gone to the ,building reserve fund by that Resolution. Bird: Yeah. You wouldn't let Bill and I do it at the end of the year last year. We wanted to do something and you told us no. That's why I'm saying that. You know, you come to the end, if you're $100 over after you do your P & L, which is your audit, what you do with that $100 whether you give it to your Board of Directors or what you do with it doesn't have anything to do with the audit. Smith: Yeah. Bird: That's why I'm really wondering why Resolution 140 is holding up the whole audit. Smith: Well, January 6th there were two other things that were holding it up, too, but as of January 7th, the only thing left was Resolution 140. He came to me to explain, Kevin Anderson, I guess, got the dates wrong. He wanted to help interpret it the way he is an auditor in the accounting field interprets it. I will tell him just put it on our management letter of what they would like us to get cleaned up. Bird: You know, Janice- Smith: He's got it all done other than - Bird: -- this is certainly no reflection on any people or anything. We pass an ordinance to the citizens of this - taxpayers of this community. Because of a Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 76 simple fact that it was four and five years of getting audits before. Two years ago, when Ron and I came on here, we said this is not going to happen anymore. You have to do it in the private world, why can't you do it in the public world? You've got a date in the private, we've got a date to meet here. These people are very good, but I - maybe I'm thick-headed, and I'm probably not understanding, but I can't see how a Resolution that deals with profit holds up an audit. Smith: With an ordinance that you created on having the audit complete by January - Bird: Fifteenth. Smith: -- is making us tow the line which we have done. Bird: And you've done a good job. Smith: All of a sudden - I'll get on them. I'll tell them to fax it over tomorrow and I'll review it. Bird: If you can't get anything, ask the Mayor to call. I mean, he should have some power with them. Ask the Mayor to call. Corrie: Will do. Smith: Yeah, because to me, an ordinance overrides a Resolution. Bird: And a Resolution, that Resolution 140 is profit money. It doesn't have a thing to do with your P & L. Smith: Yeah. It's capital improvement. Bird: But it's money that's in excess that you've made that year. You want to see a whole bunch of it. If you have a loss, you're not going to be in business very long. But that Resolution 140 deals with profit; profit is what you determine out of your audit. Now, tell me why that stops it. deWeerd: Don't shoot the messenger, Keith. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Before Keith has a heart attack, I would like to maybe request at our Strategic Planning Meeting that Janice come and explain to me, when we divided this money up and took that two million dollars in December and divided that Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 77 amongst the different departments and their capital expenditures, we'd had it down to $25,000 was all that was left as far as fudge money, and I'm really concerned and embarrassed to hear that there was $700 or $814,000, so I would like for you to explain to me at that Strategic Planning Meeting and maybe take a little more time and go through the numbers how we got that much of a variance, and if there is that much of a variance then maybe we need to look at some of the other programs that we didn't fund this year and then maybe take some time and explain that latecomers in more detail, too, because the last thing I understood, we were going to have to be paying people back $200,000, and I don't know what's happened with that. I would like to have you spend more time, and if it takes legal counsel and Gary to help explain that, I'd like to have more explanation. Not here tonight, but where we can go over those numbers. Smith: And when is the next Strategic Planning Session? Bird: January 25th, Janice. Smith: Okay. That'd be great. If you do look on that pink slip, Budget in 1998- 99, the capital outlay at that time was like - actually, that was the budget amount; the $2,435,000 and when you - to me as a scenario, when you told everybody no capital outlay, nobody gets any capital outlay, we will give $2,000,000 in capital outlay, well there was more than $2,000,000 they had budgeted for capital outlay. When you go three percent of the other expenses meaning the personnel and operating, that really went - made it go way down. I can give you some spreadsheets on that. Anderson: If you explain that in more detail next week, I'd appreciate it. Smith: But I thought this might help with also the new Council members coming on. We will give them a notebook. deWeerd: I think we're going to have to meet prior to the meeting so you can probably give us a heads-up on what we're going to know next week. Smith: I'll give you some samples of what the Council got first when all the departments that we want, we want, we want, and then (inaudible) you get, you get, you get. So I've got all those spreadsheets, and I'll pull those together and try not to make it so cumbersome as many sheets they got throughout the budget year. deWeerd: Thank you. 12. Department Reports: B. Police Chief - Bill Gordon / Meridian City Council January 181 2CX)() Page 78 1. Local veterinarians selling dog licenses: Corrie: Okay. Bill Gordon. Gordon: This will be quick. Mayor and Council, what this is is agreements with out local veterinarians to sell our dog licenses, and it's basically just giving them the authority to do it and explains how they have to get the money back to uS~ It needs to be signed yearly by the Mayor and the City Clerk. I think it deals with three or four of our veterinarians. Since we started doing that, our dog licenses just quadrupled, so it was a way for us to get those licenses out to more people. Bird: Is it a generic, all four of them in one or do we have to do it individually? Gordon: They're all individual agreements with each veterinarian. Corrie: Just move them all in one motion. Bird: That's what I was asking. Gordon: But they've all been signed by the veterinarians already. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we enter into the agreement with the veterinarians regarding selling our dog licenses through the Police Department and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Corrie: Do I hear a second? deWeerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have the license agreements of the veterinarians signed by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk approved. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Bird: Don't agreements have to be roll-call? Corrie: I'm sorry. We can do that roll-call. Roll-call vote: Mrs. McCandless, aye; Mr. Anderson, aye; Mrs. deWeerd, aye; Mr. Bird, aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Meridian City Council January 18, 2CXX) Page 79 12. Department Reports: c. Mayor Robert Corrie: 1. Planning and Zoning Commission Appointment: Corrie: Okay. On mine I've got three things; appointments, recommend to the City Council with your looking and approval on the Planning and Zoning appointment. These were sent to the Director of Planning and Zoning. They came back with the name of Sally Norton. You have her application here. He and I both agree this is probably the one, the best one we've had of the group. So I asked him if he wanted me to present that, and he said yes, so I am presenting Sally Norton as the Planning and Zoning Commissioner vacancy. Anderson: How many applicants vvere there? Corrie: I think there was 11 total. deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: I move that we approve your recommendation of Sally Norton as the new Planning and Zoning Commission appointment. Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded to approve Sally Norton as a new Planning and Zoning Commissioner on the vacancy. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES 12. Department Reports: C. Mayor Robert Corrie: 2. Parks and Recreation Committee Appointment: Corrie: Okay. The next one is the appointment of a Parks and Recreation Commission appointment. The Parks and Ree Committee put three names out. Edmond Fang, Debbie Watkins and Mark Suderman. They - out of those three, the Edmond Fang has got the most votes, I guess, and that's the one that I'm presenting to the Council for your edification and also approval. Bird: Mr. Mayor. ( Meridian City Council January 18~ 2CXX) Page 80 Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve your appointment of Ed Fang to the Parks and Recreation Committee. deWeerd: Second. Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded to approve Mr. Edmond Fang for the appointment to the Parks and Rec Committee. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES 12. Department Reports: c. Mayor Robert Corrie: 3. COMPASS Representative from City Council: Corrie: The other one, COMPASS Representative from City Council. I talked to Shari, and we also talked to someone tonight with Ron Anderson, and they said they would be willing to be the COMPASS Representative - (inaudible) Mayor of each city is on that, and then 'N8 have to have one as a representative and the other as an alternate. Let me back off and you guys can fight it out. Bird: Who did you say it was, Mayor? Anderson: He said Shari, but I think he meant - Corrie: I'm sorry. Tammy and Ron. Bird: Well, they agreed upon it, so, Tammy is the one and Ron's the alternate. Corrie: Okay. I'll entertain a motion for that. Bird: I move that Tammy deWeerd represent us on COMPASS with Ron Anderson as our alternate. Anderson: I'll second it_ Corrie: Okay. Motion made and seconded Tammy representative and Ron Anderson as alternate in case one of the tvvo of us can't be there. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Meridian City Council January 18. 2CXX) Page 81 Corrie: Okay, Tammy_ I'll get hold of COMPASS 12. Department Reports: D. City Attorney - Bill Gigray: 1 ~ Police Building Site Negotiations Report: Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, on my report, first item that's listed concerns the negotiations for the site of the proposed new police station. As a result of the discussions and the information that was provided to me, I have prepared for your consideration a Resolution which vvould amend Resolution 277 which was your previous authorization to make the $805,000 offer on the property- I've tried to set forth in the Findings the concerns of - has concerning this property as well as setting out in the various sections here the conditions of the offer. Where we are is we make - the City made an offer on the property, the seller came back with an addendum to that offer which basically had some provisions that would include the City as a co-developer of this 20-acre parcel of which the 1 0 acres that the City is interested in would come out of. We received recommendations from Gary Smith, the Public Works Director, concerning some environmental issues with that site which are just a due-diligence type of issue~ Then, concerns with regards to how to address the addendum. The specific counter offer here would be that we would propose a closing of April 1 Oth~ That's a Monday and that would follow the first Tuesday in April of this year that we would obtain or require that the seller obtain and/or the seller pay for the transactional screen, environmental site assessment update which the information received by Gary Smith and the advice was that that should be updated because I think the screen that you have was done in '98; that the seller at their expense would make application from Ada County to obtain an administrative lot split since the parcel that you are making the offer on is not a legal parcel at this point in time, and the idea of that would be that the Ada County could process that application quicker than the City~ At the same time, the seller make application to the City for annexation and zoning of the property as an R-8~ The R-8 zone will allow public use, the public use would, of course, have to come in as a conditional use after zoning~ The advantage of an R-8 zone rather than the other zone which is referenced here is that L-Q zone which 'NOuld be a permitted public use is that that may propose some Camp Plan problems, and we don't have that problem with an R-8 zone~ There was a concern about being able to use the property, and that is what Item 4 on Page 3 of this Resolution is designed to address, and that is that the seller would agree to complete the infrastructure for improvements to the west of the property including the construction of the road, sewer, water, power, cable, gas and telephone to the subject property and stub in the cul-de-sac as access to this property within one year of the date of closing. Further, the seller \IVOuld agree to do the improvements and the construction of the road across the northern portion of the property being purchased which is 1,013 feet and then would do the ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2CX)() Page 82 necessary road and curb cuts, sidewalks, water and sewer, at cetera, to City specifications, and that the City would agree to pay the seller an amount not greater than $152,000 within 30 days of final completion of that roadway and the infrastructure as provided. So this is for your consideration. I have been contacted by Dave Williams who is the co-realtor here and have advised him that this matter is before you for your consideration. I think we faxed him a copy of this proposed resolution~ Bird: They've got to still accept it, of course. Gigray: Absolutely~ Bird: This is - Bill, I've got one question. I thought we said we were going to offer on the $152,000 to pay one-half of the costs not to exceed $152,000. : That's correct. Gigray: Well, we can very easily pay -I'm reading the word upay" here. I mean, we could very easily include in here that - Bird: That way, if it comes out, you know, it might only be 1 0 or 12, it might be $2,000 or something. We might as well have the $2,000 to put into our building or whatever. You know, that one-half of the costs not to exceed $152,000. At 1 ,015 lineal feet, depending on location of the - I don't know how the utilities are going on. A couple contractors I talked to said that you could probably get it between $270,000 and $280,000 so that vvould be quite a savings~ Corrie: We just need to have (inaudible) Bird: One-half not to exceed $152,000. That is - I mean, I'm just one guy. Whatever you guys think. Gigray: I think you're probably right. Corrie: (inaudible) Do we need to do the Resolution tonight 50 that they can have that (inaudible)? Gigray: You could indude in your motion that we would prepare a revision of Condition 5 to include and specify that the City's agreement to pay is for only one-half of the cost of the installation. Bird: What is Resolution No. (inaudible) Will? Beg your pardon? Berg: 286. Excuse me, Mr~ Mayor. Just a typo referring to Dee Jay Subdivision. I believe it's D-E-E J-A-Y that's you're referring to just 50- ( ( Meridian City Council January 18. 2OCX) Page 83 *** End of Side 5 *** - I don't know if it's platted yet or not. Do you remember if Dee Jay is a platted subdivision? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, it's not platted yet; that is, it's not a recorded plat yet. The development plans have been approved for the extension of the sewer and the water. I don't believe it's been recorded yet, though. Gigray: What is its correct name? I'm sorry. Bird: D-E-E J-A- Y. Gigray: Is it all caps? Oh. I see. Unfortunately, I had a secretary named D.J. and she spelled it this way. So I may have subliminally put her in the subdivision. Bird: We're just glad to see this once in awhile so 'Ne know you're human. Gigray: Well, you know that every time you see that. deWeerd: So on No.5, you're going to put one-half of the roadway. Bird: Not to exceed $152,000. Mr. Mayor. I move that we approve Resolution No~ 286 with the changing on Item 4 to D-E-E, J-A-Y Subdivision and also on Item No.5, the last sentence the City shall agree to pay to seller one-half of the amount of the roadway not to exceed $152,000 and for the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest~ Anderson: Second. Thousand. Bird: Yeah. $152,000. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Resolution No. 286. All those in favor - deWeerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: On Item No.5, wouldn't that be, and the second sentence put "one- half of the necessary roadway" and then - because you need to include the infrastructure. Is that correct? Bird: (inaudible) deWeerd: Instead of one-half there? ( Meridian City Council January 18) 2000 Page 84 Bird: He has to do the whole thing, and then down here we agree to pay half not to exceed $152,000. deWeerd: Yeah, but you were putting the roadway in here. Wouldn't it - Bird: No. It just - the roadway comes in here. He's got to put that whole roadway in, and we agree - and the utility stuff - we agree to pay half of it not to exceed $152,000. He's got to put it I, not us. deWeerd: Right. Gigray: The way I would anticipate limiting this so it doesn't get out of control depending on what their subdivision plans are that it would just be in that 1,013- foot roadway, and that's where stubbing and curbing would be. Now, if for some reason it would appear necessary to change this, it would provide savings all the way around, they could approach us or us them about amending this agreement later on to accommodate that. But at this point, the only thing I'm aware of that they're proposing to do and requiring is to include a dedication, and in this instance, we would require them to include it in their lot split of the northern 29 feet of this property which would anticipate a road going clear across it east to west. Corrie: Thank you. All right. Okay. Roll-call vote on Resolution. Roll-call vote: Mrs. McCandless, aye; Mrs. deWeerd, aye; Mr. Bird, aye; Mr. Anderson, aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: Thank you, Bill. Are you doing Gary's too? 12. Department Reports: D. City Attorney - Bill Gigray 2. Development Agreements for Woodbridge Community, LLC: Gigray: No. The only thing I wanted to know was whether or not you wanted to entertain approving the new development agreements that were subject to the Woodbridge applications which we've now completed the process on the Findings and Conclusions. They have submitted a Development Agreement for the large parcel which is where the development is going to occur, I think is the Snorting Bull Development Agreement, and the other Agreement is the Woodbridge Community, LLC, Agreement which is the small parcel and that Agreement, basically, the Development Agreement just requires a conditional ( Meridian City Council January 181 2tXXJ Page 85 use permit on anything that they do there. I think those are both in, are they not? Both those Development Agreements? Bird: This is what we (inaudible) going to do at the end. Berg: Both signed? Gigray: Yes. Berg: Yes. Bird: Okay~ Now that was for Woodbridge and which other one, Bill? Gigray: They're both Woodbridge. Remember, Woodbridge had two parcels. One small one that I think was necessary in order to make the large one contiguous to the City_ Bird: Do we need to make two motions or one? Gigray: You could just make a motion to approve two separate resolutions to authorize the Mayor and the Clerk to sign, the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest. Bird: On the Development Agreements~ Gigray: On these Development Agreements, and you could do that in one motion then the records VIOuld show you passed them both at one time. Bird: What are the resolution numbers? 287 and 288? Berg: Yes. Bird: Mr. Mayor~ Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we approve the Resolutions 287 and 288 regarding the Development Agreement with Woodbridge Community, LLC~ Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve Resolution Nos. 287 and 288, the Woodbridge Community, LLC~ Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALLAYES ( ( Meridian City Council January 18. 2000 Page 86 Corrie: I guess I should have done a roll-call. Gary. 12. Department Reports: E. City Engineer - Gary Smith: 1. Mike Luke request to connect to city sewer: Smith: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: On January the 10th, I talked to a Mr. Mike Luke who lives in the County at 1867 Country Terrace Way. That's a subdivision between Meridian Greens on its east side, Running Brook Estates on its south and west side for most of Country Terrace. Mr. Luke is having septic tank problems. All of those lots in Country Terrace Subdivision \^/ere developed on septic tanks for their sewage treatment. They have a community well to serve them with domestic water. At the time the subdivision was developed in 1977, the developer installed a dry seYler line in the street. The sewer line grades to the south. When Running Brook Estates was developed, I required the developer to extend the sewer line up the hill and connect to the sewer line that was in the - is in the Country Terrace Subdivision. Mr. Luke's septic tank, I should say drain field is failing. The Central District Health wants him to connect to the sewer line that is in the street in front of his house. I have ascertained through the Wastewater Department that we have inspected the sewer line with a television camera as part of our maintenance of our system. I'm not quite sure why they got involved in that county sub, but, nevertheless, they did go up through the line. Service lines were installed out of the main line to each of the lots in the subdivision at the time it was built, and when I connect - when I had the Running Brook developer connect to this line, I instructed them to put a plug in the line at the downstream line of the Country Terrace Subdivision so we didn't receive anything from them inadvertently. Mr. Luke has made a request to you for approval to connect to the City. There are a couple problems with this. Number one, we don't own the sev.rer line in the street. It's a county subdivision. I believe the sewer line belongs to the homeowners. I don't know who else it would belong to. Not us. He does have a problem right now with his septic tank and drain field. It's overflowing, as he said, into the gutter out of the drain field, so we've got a health problem there. The Mr. Rooter or Master Rooter, Rota Rooter, I don't know who it is, mentioned to this Mr. Luke that there were four or five other people in the subdivision that were having similar problems. I don't know the extent of that. Anyway, Mr. Luke is asking for permission to connect to the city sevver. Bird: Gary, what do we do about if it's not our sewer line? It hooks into our main line. Meridian City Council January 18, 2CXX) Page 87 Smith: It's connected. I had it connected at the time because that's the only place it could flow. Bird: We could still charge hook-up fee, couldn't we? Smith: Oh, yes~ deWeerd: Why aren't we asking them to annex? Their contiguous - Smith: They're contiguous. That's the other part of my question was that, and I talked to him about that, Mr~ Luke about that, and he said that these folks have always been against annexing to the City of Meridian. They didn't want anything to do with us. Well, now we've got something that they need, and I asked him the question when I had him on the telephone what the attitude within the subdivision was toward annexing, and he said, well, it might be 50-SO. So it's gone up significantly from where it was because it was nothing~ Again, it's a sewer issue, and I think Mr. Luke's got a serious problem here, but - he's asking for some help on this. On the other hand, I think 'N8 need to maintain that carrot, so to speak, that we have with the sewer and the rest of the subdivision, and I think we need to let them know that this is a - we have an agreement to provide sewage or sewer, accept sewer outside our city limits that we have used in the past for these other people that have requested the service, and this should not be any different than what we've done in the past. That agreement says that, I paraphrase it, but it's something to the effect if you're annexable you will annex. Anderson: Mr. Mayor~ Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I guess the logical question is what's the next step. Do we tell this homeowner to go drum up support from his neighbors or is that staffs doing or do we take them one at a time? It would be much more feasible to just annex the whole subdivision and have them dedicate that line to us. Smith: We're going to have to - YJeIl, to ansvver your question, Councilman, in the order that you presented it, this fellow's about three lots from the end of the road, the cul-de-sac where they connect to our sewer system. So, in order to get him into the City, the first three lots - well, I guess this in effect, his lot does back up to Running Brook, too, so he could annex - we could annex him just on that basis. The one lot. But we do have to have the homeowners turn that sewer line over to us, I think, unless they want to maintain it. I guess they could do that, too. It's their sewer line as I see it Bird: But we VJOuld still get the hook-up fees. Smith: Yes. Meridian City Council January 18, 2CX)Q Page 88 Smith: Wellt we'd go up to the next manhole and block it off there, but that would still allow half a dozen lots access to the sewer without us knowing it. Corrie: Would you and your staff go explain that to the homeowners or \tVOuld you rely on Mr. Luke to try to spread the vvord in his neighborhood about annexation? Smith: We could certainly - I'm somewhat familiar with those people out there because of the community well that they have and the problems that they've had getting accesst maintaining access to that well through Running Brook. Itve talked to several of those folks before. We could certainly do that; explain the process to them and the situation. Bird: Only problem is he's got one heck of a problem right now. Smith: He does. He's got a big problem right now. He's pumping his septic tank almost every week. Bird: And it's not always doing the job. Anderson: So he may help you knock on doors. Smith: Yes. Anderson: I guess that'd be my thought is to get us some type of feedback on what the subdivision wants to do. Corrie: Time is an essence to him so you (inaudible) two or three. That's Council's choice. deWeerd: Can you do the same thing that we did earlier is allow him to hook up as long as they don't impede the process of annexation? Corrie: Well, (inaudible) lines - Anderson: We've got that line problem~ We don't own the lines. deWeerd: I mean for the whole subdivision to do it. Smith: We don't O'Nll the line. He could hook it up; all we have to do - (inaudible) go-ahead to go into our main trunk and take off. They're going to have to maintain it there, right, Gary? What about water if we annex it? Is their well - they've got a well, but do we take it over? Smith: No. Meridian City Council January 18, 2CXX) Page 89 Bird: We leave it out there and they run it themselves, too? Smith: Well- Bird: Is that City policy? Smith: No. Bird: That's what I was going to say. It isn't City policy- Smith: If we annexed, the water lines that they have within the subdivision would need to be connected to our system~ I don't know - the well that they have, I don't know anything about it. It's not a deep well, they've had some problems with it but not enough to have them knock on our door asking for water. Anderson: But that's not really a big issue. They have existing lines run already so we'd just cap their well and tie into our City water. Smith: Yes. Again, we'd be assuming their system for operation and maintenance if the whole subdivision was annexed. Corrie: Probably in the long run, it's bettef for them. Costs a little money (inaudible) annex it. Smith: Yes. I guess right now, Mr. Luke's got a bigger problem. He's not very far from where we can connect it to their line. I guess I'd like to see some way for him to connect and utilize the sewer, get out of his septic tank and drain field problem; on the other hand, we need to maintain a little bit of a lever over the subdivision itself. If we're going to serve one person, let's- Corrie: May be 20 years (inaudible) - Smith: Yeah. It's a difficult situation~ Anderson: So is two weeks enough time? That's not going to make or break him, but would that give you enough time to get some feedback fOf us so that we know what way the rest of the homeowners are going? Smith: You bet. I'll contact him and I'll contact the president. I know another fellow that lives out there, too, that I can contact so I can get some kind of a feedback from them as to how they feel about annexation. The other thing that - I'll go ahead and do that. The other thing I just wanted to plant a seed tonight is development of property outside in the county. These sewer lines that we're building on the no-name trunk, which, by the way, I found out is located on the White Drain. ( \. Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 90 : So it can be the (inaudible)? Smith: So - it can be the White - pardon me? I didn't catch the end of that one. : The White Brown Line. Smith: The White Brown Line. But, anyway, I think we need to think about how the development should take place up there in those areas because if we don't maintain city property or city boundaries out there, then we're going to lose all the building permits to Ada County like we're doing in Vienna Woods for example, and the park impact fees. Because today I had a visit from Ramon Y orgenson (sic) and he's talking about wanting to extend the line on up Ten Mile Road to the north slew and to the east because he's looking at 120 acres up there that he wants to develop, build and develop. Now all of a sudden we're almost out to Chinden. Bird: We are out to Chinden if we go with Brighton. Smith: And Brighton and I canJt remember the farmer's name. Janicek. Bird: Janicek. deWeerd: I sure hope we're seeing green space In there. Let's get that Landscape Ordinance on the (inaudible). McCandless: That's not going to help us if it's developed in the county. Bird: I'm with Gary, though. Let's make sure we get the building and the park fees and all this kind of stuff and not let the county have it and we take - and then we come in and take it. We get the hook-up fees. Smith: But the only way we can do it is to annex as we go. Bird: I think that- Smith: It has to be contiguous. Bird: -- (inaudible) but we've got to be ready to get our services (inaudible). Smith: Well, services will be there. They'll be there before the city limits are. deWeerd: Well, with all of this coming up, what needs to be done to make sure that we get those impact fees? Stiles: The Parks Director needs to amend that Impact Fee Ordinance to meet current code requirements. Has to have a capital improvement program in place ( ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2000 Page 91 for the parks and has to go to the Ada County Commissioners to get that approved so they will impose those impact fees in the county. Boise City is now requesting - Boise City already has the agreement with them. They just have requested the 10 percent increase in the park impact fees. deWeerd: Mayor Corrie. Corrie: Mrs. deWeerd. deWeerd: Who is supposed to tell Tom to be doing this because I know Shari and I have been talking to him about this until we're blue in the face. How do we get our Parks Director to do this? Anderson: Well, that's your new job. deWeerd: (inaudible) Corrie: Sit down and have a chat. deWeerd: Okay. We have to, especially if thereJs a number of developments that want in, we do not want to lose the impact fees on those. Corrie: We need to have an impact fee committee hearing (inaudible) thought about that (inaudible) Bird: (inaudible) if you and the Clerk will get together and make a list of all the Committees we've got within the City and who's on it, I'd appreciate that. Corrie: It's being done as we talk. (inaudible discussion amongst Council members) Smith: )'11 contact Mr. Luke. Thank you. Corrie: Okay. It's 10 after 12:00. )'11 entertain a motion to adjourn. Bird: So moved. Anderson: Motion made and seconded to adjourn at 10 after 12:00. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:10 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) \ I ( Meridian City Council January 18, 2QCX) Page 92 APPROVED: ATTEST: January 14, 2000 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 18. 2000 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:-.J 2- 11- I REQUEST: JANICE SMITH - TREASURER'S REPORT AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. [' I 12/10/1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN FISCAL YEAR 1999-2000 3 Year Comparison & New Budget EXPENSES-GENERAL FUND GENERAL FUND PROPOSED BUDGET !ADMIN-CITY CLERK-COUNCIL-GEN GOV.-LEGAL! PERSONNEL EXPENSE! S 303,618! $ OPERATING EXPENSE i $ 302,284 i $ CAPITAL OUTLAY EXP.! S 74,723 i $ i TOTAL: I $ 680,625 i $ ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENT I PERSONNEL EXPENSE j with Admin OPERATING EXPENSE j with Admin CAPITAL OUTLAY EXP.i with Admin INTERFUND TRANSFER i TOTAL: I $ MAYORS OFFICE I PERSONNEL EXPENSE! $ OPERATING EXPENSE I $ CAPITAL OUTLAY EXP.: $ TOTAL: i $ HUMAN RESOURCE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL EXPENSEi $ OPERATING EXPENSE $ CAPITAL OUTLAY Exp.1 $ TOTAL:) $ POLICE DEPARTMENT I PERSONNEL EXPENSEj S OPERATING EXPENSE i $ CAPITAL OUTLAY EXP.! $ TOTAL: i $ FIRE DEPARTMENT i PERSONNEL EXPENSE! $ OPERATING EXPENSE ! $ CAPITAL OUTLAY EXp.i $ TOTAL:! $ PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT i PERSONNEL EXPENSE! $ OPERATING EXPENSE i $ CAPITAL OUTLAY EXP.! $ TOTAL: i $ I ! I I with Admin j with Admin I with Admin I I - I $ i 22,615 i $ 33,683 ! $ . I $ 56,298 ! $ j 1,480, 1 38 : $ 283,582 I $ 198,789 I $ 1,962,509 ! $ I ! 521,426 ! $ 75,606 I $ 64,215 j $ 661,247 ! $ i 48,951 I $ 11 ,208 i $ . 20,000 ) $ 80,159 i $ i - i $ [ - : $ - I $ -1$ - I $ - I $ . i $ . ! $ 2,027,567 i $ 262,930 I $ 280,474 i $ 2,570,971 ) $ 528,662 I $ 95,895 I $ 222,667 j $ 847,224 $ 129,626 1 $ 214,607! $ 227,933 I $ 292,657 i $ 95,996 i $ 703,958! $ 453,555 I $. 1,211,222 ! $ 98-99 Budget . ! $ 53,277 i $ 32,720 I $ 5,000 I $ 90,997 I $ I I ) 2,469,904 ! $ 337,037 ! $ 199,740 I $ 3,006,681 I $ 1 816,408 I $ 137,800 $ 1,135,000 I $ 2,089,208 I $ ! 350,576 : $ 156,310 ! $ 978,498 i $ 1,485,384 I $ 254,025 I $ 590,031 · $ 72,226 · $ I 916,282 . $ I j I $ . $ ! $ ! $ - i $ . I 50,974 . $ 15,8981$ 'I 2,941 I $ 69,813 · $ . 54,874 I $ 28,022 I $. 2,967 i $ 85,863 . $ I I 198,436 I 92,791 i 2,000 . (128,OOO)! 165,227 I . 58,142 I 33,700 I . .. I 91,842 . .2,471,079 I $ 310,090 i $ 207,183 . $ 2,988,352 I $ . I 776,255 · $ 124,461 . $ I 957,050 . $ 1,857,766 I $ . . I I 282.439 · $ 355,874 · I I 165,676 . $ 184,500 . 592,925 I $ 645,626 I 1,041,040 i ~ .2'2~~0~i 2,729,075 333,236 1,000,000 4,062,311 GENERAL FUND TOTALS ! I i , ! PERSONNEL EXPENSE: $ 2,457,423 : $ 3,224,485 ! $ 4,028,433 i S 3,889,646 i $ 4,608,086 OPERATING EXPENSE :$ 923,088 : $ 974,771 ! $ 1,516,146 j $ 1,234,1781 $ 1,639,946 CAPITAL OUTLAY EXP.! $ 433,723 : $ 1,317,610 ! $ 2,435,238 ! $ 1,835,292 I $ 2,955,626 INTERFUND TRANSFER I $ . : $ - : $ -)$ .1$ (128,000) I i TOTALS:! $ 3,814,234 ! $. 5,516,866 i $ 7,979,817 ! $ 6,959,116 j $ 9,075,658 I : Council Approved in Public Notice: ! $ ; 9,890,000 ! ! i I Vareance: I $ 814,342 i : I 404,698 $ 284,660 $ 312,081 : $ 830,639 $ 90,511 i $ 117,000 $ 807,290 ! $ 1,232,299! $ I j with Admin I with Admin j with Admin J with Admin ; with Admin i with Admin ! j -1$ I 53,608 ) 5) 21,640 i $ - ! $ 75,248 i $ FY 2000 01/18/2000 (- ( 2 ~----------Clfi-6FMERID~N-------------l f GENERAL FUND - EXPENSE REPORT - Ending Sept. 1999 f i ~ '___3~n;~~~"-~~~~~,,-e!:~~:~~~o~~~~~~~~___J Not Audite FY 99 ADMIN. Gen.Govnt Mayor's HUMAN Total Clerk..City Council LEGAL ACCTNG Offi ce RESOURC POLICE FIRE PARKS / 0/0 of Total Budget 90/0 10/0 50/0 00/0 1%) 10/0 380/0 260/0 1 8Olc>> 1 000/0 Personnel Exp. 262,660 24,000 0 0 53,608 56,277 2,544,904 816,408 350,576 4,108,433 Operating Exp. 342,060 75,000 413,579 0 21,640 32.720 337,037 137,800 156,310 1,516.146 d Capital Outlay 100,000 1 7,000 0 0 0 5,000 199,740 1,135,000 978,498 2,435.238 BUDGET AMOUNT 704,720 116,000 413,579 0 75,248 93,997 3,081,681 2,089,208 1,485,384 8,059,817 ACTUAL EXPENSE 494,364 58,81 0 363,1 08 0 69,813 85,863 2,988,352 1 ,857 J 766 1,041,040 6,959,115 Personnel Exp. 228,801 24,000 1,224 ,0 50,974 54,874 2,471,079 776,255 282,439 3.889,646 Operating Exp. 202, 153 25,994 361,884 0 15,898 28,022 310,090 124,461 165,676 1,234,178 Capital Outlay 63,410 8,816 0 0 2,941 2.967 207,183 957,050 592,925 1,835.292 \. % of Actual 'Budget 60/0 10/0 5% 00/0 10/0 00/0 370/0 23 olc>> 1 3Olc>> 850/0 /' 0/0 of Total Budget 90/0 2% 00/0 2Olc>> 10/0 10/0 45% 270/0 130/0 1 OOO~ Proposed Budget' 827,110 201,590 0 165,227 81,578 91 ,842 4,062,311 2,460,000 1,186,000 9,075,658 Legal with Admin. Govnt. Personnel Exp. 138,600 48,590 0 198,436 59.289 58, 142 2,729,075 1,020,080 355,874 4,608,086 Operating Exp. 688,510 51,000 0 92,791 22,289 33,700 333,236 233.920 184,500 1,639,946 Cap. Outlay-Operating 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,626 9,626 Cap.Outlay-Fire Budget Approved 0 0 0 0 0 0 946,000 0 946,000 Cap. Outlay-Council Approved 102,000 0 2,000' 0 0 1,000,000 260,000 636,000 2,000,000 \.. Interfund Transfer -128,000 -128,000 Notes: (1) Council Personnel Exp.: Wages plus Benefits Benefits was listed with Admin. Personnel Exp in the prior years (2) Admin. Govnt Operating Exp.: City Clerks Oper. Exp, Legal, Street Lights & City Hall Maintenance cost. See detail on Expenditure Report (3) Accounting seperated from Clerks & Enterprise Account pays for half of Exp. (/nterfund Transfer) Enterprise Account was paying for half the Exp. In prior years, see Enterprise Exp. Reports. Council Approved in Public Notice: 9,890,0001 I Variance: 814,_3421 Audite Repo FY 95 Audite Repo FY Audite Repo FY 97 Audite Reao 98 01/18/2000 ~----------cifi-6FMERID~N-------------l , GENERAL FUND - EXPENSE REPORT - Ending Sept. 1999 , ,___~~n;~~~"-~~Ud~~~e.!!,:~~~a;~o;~~~~~~~___J ADMIN. Gen. Govnt Mayor's HUMAN Total Clerk..City Council LEGAL ACCTNG Offi ce RESOURC POLICE FIRE PARKS I % of Total Budget 110/0 10/0 10/0 00/0 00/0 00/0 300/0 160/0 400/0 1000/0 Personnel Exp. 160,800 38,400 0 0 0 0 1,051,557 449,749 66, 1 01 1,766,607 Operating Exp. 223,333 5,000 54,000 0 0 0 284,983 104,400 33,800 705,516 d Capital Outlay 135,000 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 165,000 1,715,200 2,045,200 rt BUDGET AMOUNT 519,133 43,400 54,000 0 0 0 1,366,540 719,149 1,815,101 4,517,323 ACTUAL EXPENSE 291,553 40,194 40,016 0 0 0 1,366,159 560,690 1,332,664 3,631,276 Personnel Exp. 114,846 38,400 0 0 0 0 1,046,601 384,369 69,855 1,654,071 Operating Exp. 116,014 1,794 40,016 0 0 0 240,899 86, 183 31,701 516,607 Capital Outlay 60,693 0 0 0 0 0 78,659 90,138 1,231,108 1,460,598 \. % of Actual Budget 60/0 1% 10/0 00/0 00/0 00/0 300/0 120/0 300/0 800/0 /' % of Total Budget 150/0 10/0 10/0 00/0 o o,fo 0% 340/0 17% 320/0 1 000/0 Personnel Exp. 159,900 38,400 0 0 0 0 1,181,616 513,032 105,262 1,998,210 Operating Exp. 310,400 8,000 54,000 0 0 0 311,944 98,100 91,100 873,544 d Capital Outlay 221,512 0 0 0 0 0 45,280 165,000 1,257,400 1,689,192 rt BUDGET AMOUNT 691,812 46,400 54,000 0 0 0 1,538,840 776,132 1,453,762 4,560,946 ACTUAL EXPENSE 278,759 41,623 71,022 0 0 0 1,451,695 675,244 SOOt 764 3,019,107 Personnel Exp. 126,696 38,400 0 0 0 0 1,106,815 493,232 90,274 1,855,417 Operating Exp. 138,321 3,223 71,022 0 0 0 266,646 68,783 57,786 605,781 Capital Outlay 13,742 0 0 0 0 0 78,234 113,229 352,704 557,909 '-.. % of Actual Budget 60/0 10/0 2% 00/0 0% OO,{, 32% 1 50'{' 110/0 660/0 I % of Total Budget 140/0 10/0 60/0 00/0 00/0 00/0 350/0 170/0 280/0 1000/0 Personnel Exp. 191,200 38,400 178,603 0 0 0 1,473,471 516,189 143,394 2,541,257 Operating Exp. 197,950 10,000 120,621 0 0 0 277,275 326,028 821,025 1,752,899 d Capital Outlay 392,593 0 16,280 0 0 0 205,000 90,000 614,000 1,317,873 rt BUDGET AMOUNT 781,743 48,400 315,504 0 .0 0 1,955,746 932,217 1,578,419 5,612,029 ACTUAL EXPENSE 268,287 52,246 302,788 0 0 0 1,962,509 661,246 346,650 3,593,726 Personnel Exp. 140,955 47, 195 202, 180 0 0 0 1,480,138 521,426 129,626 2,521,520 Operating Exp. 115,191 5,051 75,599 0 0 0 242,302 75,903 52,459 566,505 Capital Outlay 12,141 0 25,009 0 0 0 240,069 63,917 164,565 505,701 \.. % of Actual Budget 50/0 10/0 50/0 00/0 0% 0% 35% 12O~ 6% 640/0 I" 0;0 of Total Budget 70/0 10/0 6% 00/0 1O~ 0% 390/0 160/0 290/0 1 000/0 Personnel Exp. 201,391 24,000 302, 195 0 50,759 0 2,159,612 628,115 322,636 3,688,708 Operating Exp. 229,668 0 79,221 0 20,450 0 361,528 117,950 110,950 919,767 d Capital Outlay 35,000 24,000 30,631 0 0 0 100,808 340,000 1,511,400 2,041,839 rt BUDGET AMOUNT 466,059 48,000 412,047 0 71,209 0 2,621,948 1,086,065 1,944,9861 6,650,314 ACTUAL EXPENSE 381,297 45,975 361 ,836 0 63,336 0 2,616,260 856,718 1,004,710 5,330,132 Personnel Exp. 224,671 24,620 2661140 0 48,950 0 2,027,567 538,157 219,612 3,349,717 Operating Exp. 134,622 1,355 83,379 0 14,386 0 308,219 95,894 81,353 719,208 Capital Outlay 221004 20,000 12,317 0 0 0 280,474 222,667 7031745 1,261,207 \.. % of Actual Budget 60/0 10/0 50~ 0% 10/0 00/0 39% 130/0 150/0 800/0 ( BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL 01-05-00 IN THE MATIER OF THE ) APPLICATION OF ) WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, ) LLC, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE ) PERMIT FOR 283-LOT ) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON ) 80.83 ACRES, LOCATED AT 450 ) S. LOCUST GROVE ROAD, ) MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) Case No. CUP-99-037 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS This above el1titled conditiollalllse perluit applicatioll havil1g CaIne before tIle City COUllCil for public hearillg 011 Decell1ber 7, 1999, at the Meridiall City Hall, 33 East IdaIlo Street, Meridiall, Idallo, UpOll the FilldillgS of Fact alld COllClusiollS of Lavv alld ReCOIUIuendatioll to City COUllCil issued by the PIalulil1g alld ZOlli1lg COlTIlllissioll WI10 cOl1ducted a public hearing and having heard alld talcell oral and written testinlo11Y, and Shari Stiles, Plannillg and ZOlling Adluinistrator, appeared alld testified at the heari1lg, alld appearillg 011 behalf of the AppIica11t was Pete O'Neill, appeari11g and testifyil1g, alld affected property OvVllers Wll0 appeared al1d testified vvere: Diclc Roclaol1r, Briall Meclla111, Reese McMilliall, Alan Fox, &111 Lindley, al1d Mervin Lilldley, and havil1g duly COllsidered the l11atter alld the Planllillg alld ZOlling COlTIll1issiol11nade the followillg Fil1dil1gS of Fact FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page I of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 alld COI1ClusiollS of Law alld Recolulnelldatioll to City Council, alld the City Council havillg received the staff report and the record 11lade before the Plall11illg al1d ZOllillg COll11nissioll, alld being fully advised ill the preluises, the COllncil fillds alld concludes as follows: STATEMENT OF LEGAL AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Idaho Code 9 67 -6512 provides in part that: (A) As part of a zoning ordi11allce the City COllncilll1ay provide for the processillg of applicatio11s for special or COl1ditiollal use perlluts; alld (B) That a special use perluit lnay be gra11ted to a11 applicant if the proposed use is otherwise prohibited by the tenl1S of the zOlling ordil1a11ce, but luay be allowed wit11 C011ditio11S under specific provisio11S of the Z011i11g ordinal1ce, sllbject to the ability of political subdivisio11S, i11Cludi11g school districts, to provide services for the proposed use, alld w11e11 it is 110t i11 conflict with tIle pla11; a11d (C) That UpOl1 the gra11til1g of a special use pem1it, conditiollS l11ay be attached to a special use permit, includi11g, but not lill1ited to, those: 1 ) MillilIDzing adverse ilnpact on other developll1ellt; 2) Controlling the seque11ce and tilUil1g of development; 3 ) COl1trolling the duratio11 of developlnent; 4) Assuri11g that developl11el1t is luail1tained properly; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 5) DesigI1ating the exact locatiol1 and nature of developlnel1t; requiri11g the provision for 011-site or off-site public facilities or services; requiring lTIOre restrictive stal1dards thal1 those generally required i11 an ordil1ance; requiri11g Initigatiol1 of effects of the proposed developlne11t upon service delivery by a11Y political subdivisiol1, il1Cludil1g school districts, providil1g services withil1 the plal111ing jurisdictio11. 2. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority to provide for the processi11g of applicatio11s for C011ditiol1al Use Perl11its by the el1actment of 9 11-2-418 Municipal Code. 3. Ida110 Code 9 67-6504 provides that the City COUl1cillnay exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code wl1ich Act is 1<l10Wl1 as the "Local Lal1d Use Planni11g Act of 1975." 4. T11e City of Meridial1 has e11acted the COlnprehel1sive Plan City of Meridial1 adopted Decel11ber 21, 1993, Ordil1ance No. 629, Ja11uary 4, 1994. 5. Prior to gra11ti11g a C011ditio11al use perllut in a Low De11sity Reside11tial zone (R-4), a public hearing shall be conducted with notice to be published and provided to property OWl1ers or purchasers of record withi11 three hU11dred feet (300') of the exter11al bourtdaries of the land U11der C011sideratioll for the C011ditio11alllse perlnit all in accordance with the provisio11S of Sectio11 11-2-418E City of Meridia11 Zonillg a11d Developlue11t Ordinance, which provides as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 "Prior to approving a Conditiol1al Use Perluit, the applical1t al1d the COffi11ussio11 and Council shall follow notice al1d hearing procedures provided iI1 Section 11-2-416, Zoning AInendluent Procedures, of this Ordinance. Provided, however, that Conditiol1al Use applications for land in Old Town and il1 Industrial and COlurnercial Districts shall only be required to have 011e public hearil1g which shall be held before the Plam1i11g al1d Zoning COlumission and after tl1e reCOlTIITIel1datiol1 of the COlumission is l11ade the applicatioll sllall go before the City COUllCil without a public hearil1g and the Council may approve, deIlY, or I110dify the reCOIUlnendation of the COITI111issioI1." STATEMENT OF FACTS RELATIVE TO LEGAL AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION FINDINGS OF FACT 1. A 110tice of a public heariIlg on the cOI1ditional use perluit was published for two (2) consecutive weelcs prior to the said public hearing scheduled for DeceInber 7, 1999, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice l1avillg beell lllailed to property owners or purchasers of record withiI1 three hUlldred (300') feet of the external boulldaries of the property under consideratiollI1lore thaIl fifteeI1 (15) days prior to said hearing and with the l10tice of public hearings having been posted UpOll the property uIlder COllsideration more thaIl 011e weel( before said heari11g a11d the copies of alll10tices were Inade available to newspaper, radio alld television stations as public service al111oul1celnents; aIld the lnatter 11avi11g been dllly considered by the City Council at the said Decelnber 7, 1999, public hearillg; aIld the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 .( Applicant, affected property owners, and gover11ment subdivisio11S providi11g services within the planning jurisdictio11 of the City of Meridian, having beel1 give11 full opportunity to express COlTIlTIents and submit evidence. 2. There has bee11 C0111pliallce with all110tice and hearillg require111el1ts set forth ill Idaho Code 9967-6509 a11d 67-6512; and 9SIl-2-416E alld 11-2-418E as evidellced by the Mfidavit of Mailing, and the Mfidavit of Publicatiol1 and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. COUllCil talees judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision alld Develop111ellt Ordinallces codified at Title 11 MUllicipal Code of the City of Meridiall alld all currellt ZOlUllg lTIapS thereof and the Comprehensive Plall of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993 Ordinance #629 - January 4, 1994 alld Maps and the Ordillallce establishillg the Impact Area Boundary Ordinance and Map. 4. The property is located at 450 S. Locust Grove Road, Meridiall, Idallo. 5. The OWller of record of the subject property James F. Griffill do First Security Banle Trust Group, of Boise, Idaho. 6. Applicant is Woodbridge COlTIlTIUnity, LLC, of 100 N. 9th Street, Boise. 7. The subject property was zOlled Ada County (R- T) alld the Applicallt herein has 111ade an applicatiort to the City to al1nex alld change the ZOlUllg to Meridial1, Low Density Residelltial R-4, in Case No. AZ-99-020, whicll was granted FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 subject to a Developluent Agreell1ent. The ZOllillg district of R-4 is defilled within the City of Meridian Zoning and Developluent Ordinance, Section 11-2-408 (12). 8. The proposed application requests a conditional use pennit for the cOIlstructioll, development, maiIltenance and use of a 283 Lot Planned Ullit developlnellt. The R-4 zOlling designation and the Developlnent AgreemeIlt requires a conditiol1al use pennit be obtained. (Meridian City ZoniIlg and Developlnent OrdiIlallce, Section 11-2-409A). 9. The requested conditional use is required as a conditioll of the developll1ellt agreenlent at SectiollS 6. ConditiollS GoverIling DevelopIl1ent of Subject Property. 10. The requested conditional use is described in the CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN Dated: 8/27/99, Project 98048, H:\ 98048\ACADDWG\m-plan.dwg, MOll Aug 30, Sheet 1 of 1, TOOTHMAN & ORTON ENGINEERING COMPANY - Architects, for WOODBRIDGE AN O'NEILL ENTERPRISES COMMUNITY, for tIle developlllent of the aforelnerltiolled resideIltial projects and which property is described in the attached Exhibit "A" and consistillg of two pages. 11. Givillg due COllsideratioll to the COlnments received froITI tIle goverlllnental subdivisiollS providiIlg services in the City of MeridiaIl planlling jurisdictioll, as hereill provided for ill the conditions of approval, public facilities alld FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( services required by the proposed developmel1t will not ilnpose expense UpOl1 the public if the conditions of developlnent, as set forth in the Decision and Order 11uil1ber 2, are found to mitigate tl1e effects of the proposed use and developlnel1t upon services delivered by political subdivisions providing services to the subject real property withil1 the plal111ing jurisdictiol1 of the City of Meridian. 12. The Meridial1 City COUl1Cil recognizes that the proposed applicatio11 is in complial1ce with the Meridian COll1preh~11sive Plal1 as el1umerated il1 the RecOll11nel1dations of Approval to the City Council for A11nexatiol1 al1d Zoning of the Subject Property il1 Case No. AZ-99-020 incorporated hereil1 by reference. 13. The use proposed withi11 the subject application will in fact, COl1stitute a COl1ditiol1al use as detenm11ed by COUl1Cil actiol1 and City Ordinal1ce. 14. The use proposed within the subject applicatio11 will be subject to the cOl1ditions as set forth in the Decision al1d Order under nlll11ber 2, and will be designed, c011structed, operated and lnaintained to be harmonious and appropriate il1 appearal1ce or intended character of the gel1eral vicirlity a11d that such use will110t chal1ge the inte11ded esse11tial c11aracter of the saIne areae 15. The use proposed withi11 the subject application will not be hazardous or disturbiI1g to existing or future neighboril1g uses. 16. The use proposed withi11 the subject applicatioI1 will be served FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( adequately by ce11tral public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police a11d fire protectio11, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water a11d sewer. 17. The applicant has agreed to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges, if al1Y associated with the use. 18. The use proposed within the subject application will not i11volve uses, activities, processes, Inaterials, equipment and COl1ditions of operatio11 that will be detrilnental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, slnoke, fUlnes, glare or odors. 19. Sufficie11t parl<i11g for the proposed use of the property will be provided. 20. The use will 110t result in the destruction, loss or dall1age of l1atural or sce11ic features of l11ajor il11portal1ce relating to the property. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby ORDER and this does Order that: 1. That the Applicant al1d owner of the property, a11d is granted a conditional use perInit for the proposed application request of a COI1ditiol1al use perl11it FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 for the COl1structioIl, developlnent, mail1tenance al1d use of a 283 Lot Planned Ul1it reside11tial developll1ent, as described i11 the CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN Dated: 8/27/99, Project 98048, H:\ 98048\ACADDWG\rn-plan.dwg, MOl1Aug 30, Sheet I of I, TOOTHMAN & ORTON ENGINEERING COMPANY - Architects, for WOODBRIDGE AN O'NEILL ENTERPRISES COMMUNITY, for tI1e developll1e11t of tIle aforell1e11tioned projects a11d Wllich property is described i11 the attached Exhibit "An and COl1sisting of two pages. 2. The cOl1ditional use per111it granted herein is subject to the following terlllS al1d C011ditions: 2.1 HOlne Types. The Developll1el1t shall consist of a l11ix of hOlnesite types desigIlated A, B, C alld D as set forth on the Master Site Pla11. The locatio11 and Inix of lot types shall be detenl1ined by tIle Developer based on Inarl(et delnalld, with the aggregate total not to exceed 283 units. The lots located east of Five Mile Creel( 011 the 110rthern border of the Developlnent adjacent to the Greenhill Estates Subdivision shall be limited to Type D lots. 2.1.1 All plats in the Developlnent shall cOlnply with the requirelnents of Idaho Code Sectiol15 0-222(a). 2.1.2 The subject real property is subject to a developlnent agreell1e1lt, the terll1S of which were approved by City Council alld which developlnellt agreelnellt shall be considered alnended to reflect terll1S of this conditiollal use perll1it. Specific Developl1lellt Requirell1e1lts 2.1.3 Master Site Plall. The Developll1ent shall be cOllstructed substantially ill accorda1lce with the Master Site Plall, CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN Dated: 8/27/99, Project 98048, H:\ 98048\ACADDWG\Ill-plall.dwg, MonAug 30, FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( S11eet 1, TOOTHMAN & ORTON ENGINEERING COMPANY - Architects, for WOODBRIDGE AN O'NEILL ENTERPRISES COMMUNITY, al1d hereinafter referred to as "Master Site Plan". The Master Site Plan is a guide for the Development, recognizing the need for flexibility during the platting process. 2.1.4 MaxilTIUIU Number of Units. The Developmel1t s11all contail1 no n10re thal1 283 U11i ts . 2.1.5 Open Space. The Development shall include a minimum of 14 acres of open space generally consistent with the Master Site Plan. The term "open space" shall include, without limitation, an active recreation area and community center, pocket parks, linear parks along roadways, greenbelt corridors along Five- Mile Creek only site wetlands and corridors between neighborhoods. To the extent it is not located in the ACHD right-of-way, the Developer shall convey the open space to a homeowners' association following both the final plat approval for the phase of the Developlnent il1 which the open space is cOl1tail1ed al1d the completion of the iluprovelnents. 2.1.6 Access. a. Primary Access. Prilnary Access shall be fr0111 Locust Grove Road a11d shall il1corporate a landscaped traffic divider at the entryvvay (illustratiol1 1 to the Master Site Plan). b. Secondary Vehicular Access. The Developer shall provide a secondary vehicular access poi11t to the boundary of Woodbridge to the south-southeast as ShOWl1 on the Master Site Plan (or at another point as otherwise mutually agreed by the Developer, the City and ACHD). The seC011d vehicular access shall be identified prior to the sublnittal of the final plat of a11Y property to the east of Five Mile Creek. The secondary vehicular access shall be operable prior to the issuance of the 200th building pern1it for the Develop1uent. c. Emergency Access Location. The Developer shall construct emergency access to the juncture of Weatherby Drive and the property line adjacent to Greenhill Estates prior to the issua11ce of the lOath occupancy pennit for the Development. Until the 1 66th certificate of occupancy is issued, the emergency access 1nay be an unpaved all-weat11er surface. The Developer shall COl1struCt or FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 cause to be constructed a11 18- foot-wide, all weather grass crete surface betwee11 Greenhill Estates and the developlnent including a 5-foot-wide Ineandering pathway or another desigI1 approved by ACHD, the City and the developer; shall installl<Ilock-down bollards at the property line to preve11t use except i11 case of emergencies. All designs shall be approved by ACHD and the City. Developer will also put these improvelne11ts within a dedicated 50-foot right-of- way which would allow for a penl1anent vehicular access POi11t if, as and whe11 the ACHD deterlnil1es it should become the secondary access or a perll1anent access. 2.1.7 Locust Grove Landscaping Strip. The Developer shall il1stallla11dscapi11g alol1g Locust Grove Road per the plans attached as illustratio11s 2 and 3 to the Master Site Plan or as otherwise required by ACHD. Developer shall C011Struct the la11dscape buffer gel1erally consiste11t with these plans in lieu of the twe11ty (20) foot "landscaping strip" requirelnent of Meridia11 City Code S 11-9-605.G. Developer shall SUblnit detailed landscape plans consistel1t with illustrations 2 and 3 for City Staff approval. 2.1.8 Pathways. a. Public Roadways. Public pathways and sidewalks will be C011structed along all roadways within the Developlnel1t as identified on t11e pathway plal1 attached to the Master Site Plan as illustration 4. An eight (8) foot wide asphalt public pathway will be constructed along, but detached froIn, Locust Grove Road and Woodbridge Drive. Five (5) foot concrete sidewall,s will be constructed 011 both sides of all neighborhood roads as well as the loop road identified 011 the east side of the Developluent. b. Five Mile Creel,. A soft surface pedestrian pathway will be constructed along Five Mile Creel, as generally depicted on the Master Site Plan, illllstratio11 4. This pathway shall be Inade available for public use at such tilne that the pathway ca11 be con11ected to a larger public pathway system beyond the boundaries of the Development. c. Private Pathways. Private pathvvays will be C011strllcted withil1 the Developl11el1t allowil1g for direct C011nectio11S between individual neighborhoods and other FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page II of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 segIl1e11ts of the overall pathway pla11, generally as depicted 011 the Master Site Plan, illustration 4. 2.1.9 Five Mile Creel( Enhancelnent. In cooperation with the Nalnpa & Meridian Irrigation District ("NMID") and all affected age11cies, the Developer will protect and enha11ce Five Mile Creel( and adjacent wetlands consiste11t with the Master Site Plan and applicable laws. 2. 1. 10COlTIll1U11ity Ce11ter. The Developlnent shall i11clude a cOlnmunity ce11ter designed and c011structed in a location C011sistent with the Master Site Pla11. The cOll1munity center shall include the followi11g aluenities, at a mi11ilTIUlTI: . Multi-purpose room . Restroolns/Changing rooms . Mechanical Equiplnent room . Swimlui11g pool . Spa or children's wading pool . Reside11t drop-off and parldng Approved Deviations from Subdivisiol1 and Zoning Requirements 2.1.1 I Inapplicability of Certain PD-R Requirell1ents. The City aclG10wledges tllat, dlle to the fact the Developlnent COllsists of single fal11ily residential COl1Structio11. the following planned developmellt - residential ("PD-R") applicatioll a11d correspondil1g substantive requirelTIellts do not apply to the Developlnel1t: a. Sllblnissioll of specific elevatiol1 exhibits. b. Specification of architectural style and building desigIl. c. Sublnissio11 of building materials and color. d. DesigIlation of garbage, storage and public parldl1g areas. e. Designatioll of storage areas, guest parldng spaces and mainte11allce buildillg. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( 2. I. 12Special Sta11dards for the Woodbridge COlTIillU11ity. The following sta11dards shall apply to the Development in lieu of the correspollding standards in the zoning and subdivision ordinances: a. HOlnesite Dilne11sio11al Standards: HOlTIesite MilUlnUlTI Front Rear Interior Street Maxin1UlTI MinilTIUln Type Lot Size Yard Yard Side Side Yard Building Street (Sq. Feet) Setbacl( Setbaclc Yard Setbaclc Height Fro11tage (I) Setbaclc Type A 4,800 10JlI5'/20' 5'/15' 0'/5' IS' 35' 48' (2) (3) (4) (5) Type B 5 ,500 10'/15'/20' 15' 5' IS' 35' 55' (2) (5) Type C 7,500 10'/15'/20' 15' 5' 15' 35' 75' (2) (5) Type D 8,000 10'/15'/20' IS' 5' IS' 35' 80' (2) (5) ( 1) All frol1t yard setbacks shall be measured froln baclc of sidewall<-. See illustratiol1 5 in Master Site Plan. (2) Idel1tifies frOl1.t yard setbaclcs for: side-elltl)' garage/living area/garage face. See illustrations 5 and 6 in Master Site Plan. (3) Identifies rear yard setbacks for: detached garages/attached garages and living areas. See illustratiol1. 7il1 Master Site Plall. (4) Zero lot line allowance for detached garages and associated living area only, all livil1g area within the prilnal)' dwelling is to be set bacl( a minilnUlTI of 5 feet. See illustratiol1. 7 in Master Site Plan. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( (5) Homesites OllJ or adjacent tOJ COlllinOll driveway lots (defined and regulated below)J flag lotsJ outside corner lotsJ and cul-de-sac streets lnay have a lesser frol1tage. The lninimum frontage exceptiollS for these lots are as follows: Flag lots: Outside corner lots: Cul-de-sac streets: Cul-de-sac bulb: Lots taldng access froIn COlnmOll driveway lot: 20 feet Ininill1UI11 30 foot chord IninimUlTI 60 foot nlinilnUlll 30 foot chord Ininimun1 No frontage required on public street b. Commoll Driveway Lots. The Development may include COllliTIOn driveway lotsJ Wl1ich are separately plattedJ nOll-buildable lots desigIled to COllsist of a paved COlmnon driveway to serve other lots. COlnmoll driveway lots shall be owned and maintained by the HOlTIeowner's Associatioll. The follo'Wi11g criteria shall apply to COlmTIOn driveway lots in lieu of allY other requirelnents of the subdivisio11 or zoning ordillallce: MaxilTIUm length (at COlTIInOn driveway li11e): Mi11ilTIUlTI 'Width: Mini111ull1 pavelne11t 'Width: Minimum building setbacl(: MinilTIUm frontage: MinilTIUlTI all-lot driveway length: Maxill1UlTI number of lots taldng access fraIll a sil1gle COlTIln011 driveway 150 feet 20 feet 20 feet* I 0 feet 20 feet 20 feet* 4 lots * Uluess the City Fire Departlnent approves a narrower width or s110rter length. d. Subdivision Requireluents. To facilitate proper desigI1 and to accoIumodate topographYJ the follo'Willg subdivision ordina11ce requirelnents shall110t apply to the Developlnent (Le. the minimulll and maximum lengths defined in the ordinance shall not apply): FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 1. Cul-de-sac length on the cul-de-sac street south of the comlnunity center ge11erally as sl10wn on the Master Site Plan. 11 Blocl( lel1gth. Gel1eral Conditions. 2.1.13Complial1ce with Zoning and Subdivisio11 Requireluents. Tl1e Develop111el1t sl1all meet all of the requiremel1ts of the R-4 Z011e, except as specifically set forth elsewhere in these C011ditions of Approval. The Developlnent shall also COll1ply with the requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, to the extel1t those requirelnents are not inconsistent with these conditiol1s of approval il1 accordance with al1 approved pla11l1ed developlnent application. The intent is that specific subdivisiol1, z011ing and other City ordi11ance requiren1e11ts will be applied so as to allow the ilnplelnentatio11 of the Master Site Pla11 and the gel1eral i11tent of the Developlue11t Applications. 2.1.14Installation of I11frastructure and Utilities. Subject to the conditions set fortl1 elsewhere in this Agreelnent, the Developer shall construct or cause to be C011structed all sanitary sewers, storln drains, pumping statio11s, water Inains a11d appurte11ances, fire hydrants, curbs, gutters and sidewallcs, pressurized irrigation systems, electrical transmission lines, 11atural gas lines, telepho11e lines, sidewallcs, cross drains, street surfacing, street Sigt1S, street lighting and barricades as well as any and all other improve111el1ts required to build the Developluel1t gel1erally C011sistent with the Master Site Pla11. Tl1e ilnproven1el1ts defined in this paragraph are herei11after referred to as the "I11frastructure". The Developer shall have the flexibility to design and build the Infrastructure i11 a way that i111plements the Master Site Plan and to lneet the requirements of the age11cies a11d entities having jurisdiction over the Infrastructure. The Infrastructure for the Developlnel1t shall be dedicated to the appropriate public entities, which shall aSSUlne all obligatiol1s to mail1tain the Il1frastructure. 2 .1.15W ater al1d Sewer Sizi11g and Routing. Developer shall coordil1ate water and sewer sizing and routing with the Public Worl(s Departlnent. To the extent Developer is required to construct sewer or water lines larger than required to serve the Developlnent, the Developer and the City shall enter into al1 appropriate late- FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 COIners agreelnent to reimburse Developer for the excess costs incurred by Developer as allowed by City Ordinance. 2.1.16Underground Utilities. All utilities within the Developll1e11t will be i11stalled u11derground. 2.1.17Road Sections. The Developer shall construct road sections generally consistent with the street sections included as illustratio11s 3, 8, 9 a11d 10 il1 the Master Site Plan or as otherwise required by the Ada County Highway District ("ACHD"). 2. 1. 18Irrigation System. Subject to the approval of the NMID, Developer shall design and construct a pressurized irrigation system that NMID will own and operate. This system will cover all common area landscaping and private yard areas within the Developlnent. 2.1.190ther Irrigation and Drainage Ditches. With the exception of Five Mile Creek, all existing irrigation and drainage ditches crossing the property shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M or Developer shall provide an alternative delivery system. The ditches to be tiled and/or alternative delivery systelns shall be shown on the prelimi11ary plats. Plans lnust be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, as required by law, with written confirmation of the approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2.1.20Existing Wells and Septic Systems. Existing domestic wells and lor septic systems on Parcel A lTIUSt be removed frolu dOluestic service per City Ordinance Sectio11 5-7 -517. Existing wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.1.21 Flood Plain Perlnits. Developer shall obtai11 any perlnits for Flood Plai11 Developlnel1t that are required by City ordi11a11ce per criteria outlined in the ordinance. 2.1.22Signage. Detailed signage plans will be subject to design review and separate permits as required by the terms of the Developme11t Agreement and the approved Conditional Use Perluit. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 16 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 2.1.23Trash Enclosures. Developer shall coordinate locations and construction requirements for the c0111munity center trash enclosures vvith Meridian Sanitary Service, Inc. ("MSS"), and provide a letter of approval froln MSS prior to applying for buildi11g perlnits for the COlllll1U11ity center. 2.1.24Phasing a11d Platti11g. Developer intends to build the Developlne11t in two or lnore phases. To COlnmence the developlne11t of a phase, the Developer vvill sublnit a plat application for the phase (or several phases or the entire Developlnent as Developer deterlnines in its sole discretion). 2.1.25Infrastructure Installation in Conjunctio11 vvith Plat. Developer vvill install the Infrastructure servillg the phase as part of the phase, and vvill not record any plats for subsequent phases of the Developlnent llntil the Infrastructure for the 011goi11g p11ase is cOlnpleted. All I11frastructure for the Developlne11t shall be C0111pleted or b011ded for cOlnpletion in a Inal1ner generally consistent vvith the Master Site Plan in conjunction vvith the final phase of the Developlne11t, at the latest. 2.1.26Fe11cing Details in Plat. Eac11 plat shall address fencil1g details for the portion of the Developlnent covered by the plat. The perilneter fellce shall be of a "good 11eighbor" design, i.e., the fence shall be of a quality appearance 011 both sides. 2.1.27 As-Built Dravvillgs. For each phase, Developer shall cOlnply vvith the requirelnellts of the Meridiall City Code and duly adopted City Public W orl(s Standards alld Specifications for sublnission alld inspection of plans a11d as-built dravvings for the Infrastructure, as well as the inspection of the constructed Illfrastructure. 2.1.28Illcorporation into Development Agreelnel1t. These conditio11S of approval shall be incorporated il1to a Developlne11t Agreelnent to be approved by the City Council, which shall replace these COl1ditio11S a11d the fillal Develop111e11t Agreelnent and shall be the guidi11g document for assessi11g future plats i11 the Development. Provided, however, t11at the provisions of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordillances shall continue to apply to the Developlnent to the extent those provisions are not incOllsistent vvith these conditions of approval. These conditions of approval and the Develop111ent Agreement s11all act il1 lieu of subdivision or zoning ordi11ance requirelnents that are inconsistent vvith t11ese FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 17 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 conditions in accordance with an approved planned development application, whether currently contained in the Meridian City Code or subsequently adopted. 3. That the City Attorney draft an Order Granting Conditional Use Permit in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a conformed copy shall be served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney and any affected party requested notice. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 18 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final actio11 of tl1e gover11i11g body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67 -65 21 a11 affected person bei11g a perso11 w110 has a11 interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the c011ditio11al use perll1it Inay withi11 twe11ty-eight (28) days after the date of t11is decisiol1 and order seel( a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idal10 Code. By action of the City COU11Cil at its regular Ineeting held on the of d~;;- ,-+99-9-2000. ROLL CALL /B~ day .. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED ~C<..-- COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED~ COUNCILMAN deWEERD VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN McCANDLESS VOTED~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 19 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS / WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAl<ER) DATED: /-18-00 APPROVED: ~ VOTED MOTION: DISAPPROVED: Copy served UpOl1 Applicant, the Plal111il1g al1d Z011ing Departl11el1t, Pllblic W or1es Departlnent al1d City AttoDley. I-I g-fJO By: City C erle Dated: - ..... - FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 20 of 20 USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS I WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES I CUP-99-037 ( BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR A ) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 283 LOT ) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES, ) LOCATED 450 S. LOCUST GROVE ROAD, ) MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) ) ) ) o 1-06-00 CASE NO. CUP-99-037 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT This matter coming before the City Council on the 7th day of December, 1999, under the provisions of ~ 11-2-418 E Municipal Code of the City of Meridian for final action on conditional use permit application and the Council having received and approving the Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission the Cou11cil talces the following actiol1: I. Tl1at tl1e Applica11t al1d 0W11er of t11e property is granted a conditiol1al use permit for the proposed application request of a conditional use permit for the cOl1struction, developll1e11t, 111ai11te11ance al1d llse for a 283 Lot Plan11ed Ul1it reside11tial develop111el1t as described in the CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN Dated: 9/27/99, Project 98048, H:\98048\ACADDWG\m-plan.dwg, Mon Aug 30, Sheet 1 of I, TOOTHMAN & ORTON ENGINEERING COMPANY - Arc11itects, for WOODBRIDGE AN O'NEILL ENTERPRISES COMMUNITY, for the development of the aforementioned projects and which property is described in the attached Exl1ibit "A" a11d C011sisti11g of two pages. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 1 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( 2. That tl1e above 11alTIed applica11t is gra11ted a conditio11al use perll1it for a 283 Lot Pla1111ed U11it developll1e11t, located 450 S. Locust Grove Road, Meridian, Idal1o, subject to the followi11g C011ditio11S of use a11d developll1e11t: 2. 1 Hon1e Types. The Develop1TIe11t shall C011sist of a 111ix of hOll1esite types desig11ated A, B, C and D as set fortl1 011 the Master Site Pla11. The locatiol1 al1d 111ix of lot types shall be deterlui11ed by the Developer based 011 Inarleet delTIa11d, with the aggregate total11ot to exceed 283 U11its. The lots located east of Five Mile Creel( on the 11ortl1er11 border of the Developlne11t adjace11t to the Greenhill Estates Sllbdivisiol1 sl1all be lilnited to Type D lots. 2.1.1AlI plats i11 tl1e Developll1el1t shall COll1ply with the requirelne11ts of Idal10 Code Sectiol15 0-222(a). 2.1.2The subject real property is subject to a developlnel1t agreel11e11t, tl1e terlns of which were approved by City Council al1d which developll1ent agreell1el1t shall be considered all1ended to reflect terll1S of this conditiol1al use pernlit. Specific Developll1e11t Requirements 2.1.3Master Site Plan. Tl1e Developll1e11t shall be constructed substantially il1 accordal1ce with the Master Site Plan, CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN Dated: 8/27/99, Project 98048, H:\ 98048\ACADDWG\ln-plaI1.dwg, M011 Aug 30, Sheet I, TOOTHMAN & ORTON ENGINEERING COMPANY - Architects, for WOODBRIDGE AN O'NEILL ENTERPRISES COMMUNITY, and hereil1after referred to as "Master Site Plall". The Master Site Plal1 is a guide for the Develop1ne11t, recogllizing the 11eed for flexibility dllrillg the platting process. 2.1.4Maxi111UIU NUll1ber of U11its. The Develop1TIellt shall cOl1tai11 110 11lore tha11 283 Ulli ts . 2.1.50peI1 Space. The Develop1ne11t shall include a 11li11ill1Ulll of 14 acres of open space ge11erally COllsistel1t with the Master Site Plan. The terlll "ope11 space" shall include, witl10ut lilTIitatioll, al1 active recreation area and COllllTIll11ity center, pocl(et parl(s, linear parIes alol1g roadways, greel1belt corridors alo11g Five-Mile Creele 011ly site wetla11ds a11d corridors between 11eighborhoods. To the exte11t it is not located in the ACHD right-of-way, the Developer sl1all convey the opel1 space to a 11olueoWl1ers' ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PER1v1IT - PAGE 2 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 associatiol1 followil1g both the final plat approval for the phase of the Developn1el1t il1 wl1icl1 tl1e opel1 space is cOl1tained and tl1e completion of the ilnproveluents. 2.1.6Access. a Prilnary Access. PriInary Access shall be froIu LOCllst Grove Road al1d shall il1corporate a la11dscaped traffic divider at the entryway (illustratiol1 I to t11e Master Site Pla11). b. Seco11dary Vehiclllar Access. The Developer shall provide a secol1dary ve11iclllar access point to tl1e boundary of Woodbridge to the south-soutl1east as Sl10Wl1 011 t11e Master Site Plal1 (or at al10ther POil1t as otl1erwise lTIutually agreed by the Developer, the City and ACHD). The seco11d vel1icular access shall be identified prior to the subluittal of the fi11al plat of a11Y property to tl1e east of Five Mile Creel(. The secondary vehicular access shall be operable prior to the issuance of the 200th buildil1g perluit for the Developlne11t. c. El11ergency Access Locatio11. The Developer shall construct elnerge11cy access to the jll11cture of Weatherby Drive a11d the property line adjacent to Gree11hill Estates prior to the issuance of the lOath occupancy permit for the Developn1e11t. Until the 166th certificate of occupal1cy is issued, the elnergency access lnay be an ul1paved all-weatl1er surface. Tl1e Developer sl1all COl1struct or cause to be constructed a11 18- foot-wide, all weatl1er grasscrete surface betwee11 Greel1l1ill Estates a11d t11e developn1e11t includi11g a S-foot-wide 111ea11deri11g pathway or al10ther desig11 approved by ACHD, the City a11d tl1e developer; shall installlmocl(-doWl1 bollards at tl1e property lil1e to prevent llse except il1 case of e111erge11cies. All desigt1s shall be approved by ACHD and tl1e City. Developer will also put these ilTIprOVelnel1ts withil1 a dedicated 50-foot right- of-way wl1ich would allow for a perInane11t vehicular access POi11t if, as a11d vvhen the ACHD deter111il1es it should becol11e the seco11dary access or a permanent access. 2.1.7 Locust Grove Landscaping Strip. The Developer shall installla11dscapi11g alol1g Locust Grove Road per the plans attached as illustratio11s 2 al1d 3 to the Master Site Plan or as otherwise required by ACHD. Developer sl1all ORDER OF CONDITIONAL AFPROV AL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 3 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( construct the landscape buffer generally consistent with these plans in lieu of the twenty (20) foot "landscaping strip" requirement of Meridian City Code S 11-9-605.G. Developer shall submit detailed landscape plans consistent with illustrations 2 a11d 3 for City Staff approval. 2.1.8 Patl1ways. a. Public Roadways. Public pathways and sidewalks will be constructed along all roadways within the Development as identified on the pathway plan attached to the Master Site Plan as illustration 4. An eight (8) foot wide asphalt public pathway will be constructed alo11g, but detached froln, Locust Grove Road and Woodbridge Drive. Five (5) foot COl1crete sidewall,s will be cOl1structed 011 both sides of all neighborhood roads as well as the loop road identified on the east side of tl1e Develop1ue11t. b. Five Mile Creek. A soft surface pedestrian pathway will be constructed along Five Mile Creek as generally depicted on the Master Site Plan, illustration 4. This pathway shall be made available for public use at such time that the pathway can be connected to a larger public pathway system beyond the boul1daries of t11e Developl11ent. c. Private Pat11ways. Private pathways will be cOl1structed within tl1e Developnlel1t allowing for direct connectiollS betwee11 individual neighborhoods and other segments of the overall pathway plan, generally as depicted on the Master Site Plan, illustratiol1 4. 2.1. 9 Five Mile Creek Enhancement. In cooperation with the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District ("NMID") and all affected agencies, the Developer will protect and enhance Five Mile Creek and adjacent wetlands consistent with the Master Site Plal1 and applicable laws. 2. 1. 1 o Community Center. The Development shall include a community center desig11ed al1d C011structed in a location C011sistent with the Master Site Plal1. The community center shall include the following amenities, at a minimum: · Multi-purpose roon1 · RestroOlTIs/C11al1gi11g r001115 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 4 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 / I \ (- · Mecha11ical Equipluent roonl · SwilTIlTIillg pool · Spa or childrell' s wadil1g pool · Resident drop-off alld parldng Approved Deviatio11s froITI Subdivisio11 and Z011iIlg RequireIuellts 2.1.11Inapplicability of Certain PD-R Requirements. The City acknowledges that, due to tIle fact tIle Developluel1t COllsists of sillgle fall1ily residelltial construction. the followillg plallned developlnellt - residential ("PD-R") application and corresponding substa11tive requirenlel1ts do 110t apply to the Develop11lent: a. SUb111issioll of specific elevatiol1 exllibits. b. Specification of architectural style alld building desigll. c. Submission of building materials and color. d. Design~tioIl of garbage, storage and public parldng areas. e. Designation of storage areas, guest parking spaces and maintenance building. 2.1.12Special Standards for the Woodbridge Community. The following standards shall apply to tIle Developmellt ill lieu of the corresponding stalldards ill the ZOllillg and subdivision ordillallces: a. HOll1esite Dilnensiollal Standards: HOluesite Mi11illlU Front Rear Il1terior Street Maxill1UlTI Minill1UlTI Type 111 Yard Yard Side Side Yard Buildillg Street Lot Size Setbaclc Setbaclc Yard Setbaclc Heigllt Frolltage (Sq. Feet) (I) Setbacl( 4,800 10'/15'/20 5'/15' 0'/5' 15' 35' 48' Type A , (3) (4) (5) (2) ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 5 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 I \ 5,500 10'/15'/20 15' 5' 35' 55' Type B , 15' (5) (2) 7,500 10'/15'/20 15' 5' 35' 75' Type C , 15' (5) (2) 8,000 10'/15'/20 15' 5' 35' 80' Type D , 15' (5) (2) (I) All fr011t yard setbacl(s shall be lneasured frOITI bacl, of sidewall,. See illllstratio11 5 i11 Master Site Plan. (2) Identifies front yard setbacks for: side-entry garage/living area/garage face. See illustrations 5 a11d 6 il1 Master Site Pla11. (3) Identifies rear yard setbacks for: detached garages/attached garages and living areas. See illustration 7 in Master Site Plal1. (4) Zero lot line allowance for detached garages and associated living area only, all livi11g area withi11 t11e pril11ary dwellil1g is to be set bacl, a Inil1ilnUl11 of 5 feet. See illustration 7 in Master Site Pla11. (5) Homesites on, or adjacent to, common driveway lots (defined and regulated below), flag lots, outside corner lots, and cul-de-sac streets may have a lesser frontage. T11e l11inil11um frontage exceptiol1S for these lots are as follows: Flag lots: Outside cor11er lots: Cul-de-sac streets: Cul-de-sac blllb: Lots talting access frol11 COlTIlTI011 driveway lot: 20 feet lui11ill1l1111 30 foot c110rd 111i11ill1l1111 60 foot 111i11ilTIlllTI 30 foot chord 111i11ilTIUlTI No fro11tage required on public street ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 6 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 b. COlTIlTIOn Driveway Lots. ( The DeveloplTIent lnay il1clude COlTIlTI011 driveway lots, which are separately platted, 11011-buildable lots desigl1ed to COl1sist of a paved CO 1111110 11 driveway to serve otller lots. Co 1TI 111 0 11 driveway lots shall be oWl1ed al1d 111ail1tailled by tIle HOll1eoWller's Associatiol1. The followillg criteria shall apply to COI11111011 driveway lots in lieu of any other requirell1ents of the subdivision or zonillg ordinance: MaxilTIUll1 lellgth (at COll1ll1011 driveway lille): MillilTIUlTI width: Millill1Ull1 pavelnent width: MillilTIUln buildillg setbacl(: Mi11ilTIUll1 frontage: Mi1lilTIUlTI on-lot driveway length: MaxilTIUll1 l1Ull1ber of lots taldng access frOlTI a sillgle COlTIlTIOll driveway 150 feet 20 feet 20 feet* 1 0 feet 20 feet 20 feet* 4 lots * Unless the City Fire Department approves a narrower width or shorter length. d. Sllbdivision Requirell1ellts. To facilitate proper desigl1 and to aCCOll1lTIodate topography, the followillg subdivision ordillallce requirell1ellts shallllot apply to the Developlnent (i.e. the 111illill1Ul11 a11d l11axilTIUll11ellgths defilled ill the ordillance shall not apply): i.Clll-de-sac lellgth on tIle cul-de-sac street south of the COlTIl11l111ity cel1ter gellerally as ShOWll 011 the Master Site Plall. ii Blocl( lengtIl. Gelleral COllditions. 2.1.13COl11pliallce with Zoni11g alld Subdivisioll Requirel1lellts. TIle Developll1e11t s!lalll11eet all of the requirelnents of the R-4 ZOlle, except as specifically set forth elsewhere ill these COllditiollS of Approval. The Developll1e11t sIlall also cOlTIply with the requirell1ellts of the ZOlling alld Subdivision Ordi11allces, to the extellt those requireme11ts are 110t inconsistellt with these conditio11S of approval in accordal1ce with all approved planlled developlnel1t applicatio11. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 7 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( The intent is that specific subdivisio11, Z011i11g a11d other City ordina11ce requirelnents will be applied so as to allow the ilnplelne11tatio11 of the Master Site Plan and the ge11eral il1te11t of the Developll1el1t Applicatiol1s. 2. I. 14I11stallatiol1 of I11frastrllcture and Utilities. Subject to the COl1ditio11S set forth elsew11ere i11 this Agreell1e11t, the Developer shall C011struct or cause to be c011structed all sanitary sewers, stor111 drai11s, pUlnpil1g statio11s, water 111ail1S a11d appurtena11ces, fire hydra11ts, curbs, gutters a11d sidevvall(s, pressl.lrized irrigation systellls, electrical transmission li11es, l1atural gas lil1es, telep11011e li11es, sidewall(s, cross drail15, street surfacing, street signs, street lighting a11d barricades as well as a11Y and all other ilnproveme11ts required to build the Developll1ent generally consiste11t wit11 the Master Site Plan. The ill1provelne11ts defi11ed i11 this paragraph are herei11after referred to as the "I11frastructure". T11e Developer s11all have tl1e flexibility to desig11 a11d build t11e I11frastructure il1 a way that ill1plelne11ts the Master Site Pla11 a11d to Ineet tl1e requirelne11ts of the age11cies and e11tities havi11g jurisdicti011 over t11e I11frastructure. The I11frastructure for the Developlne11t shall be dedicated to the appropriate public entities, which shall aSSUl11e all obligatio11s to Inai11tai11 the Infrastructure. 2 .1.15W ater a11d Sewer Sizing and Routi11g. Developer shall coordi11ate water a11d sewer sizi11g and routing wit11 the Public W orl(5 Departll1e11t. To tl1e exte11t Developer is required to C011struct sewer or water li11es larger than required to serve the Developlne11t, the Developer and t11e City shall e11ter into al1 appropriate late-COIners agreell1e11t to reilnburse Developer for t11e excess costs i11curred by Developer as allowed by City Ordi11a11ce. 2. I. 16U11dergrou11d Utilities. All utilities within the Developlne11t will be installed u11derground. 2.1.17Road Sectio11S. T11e Developer shall C011struct road sectio11S ge11erally C011siste11t with the street sectiol1S il1cluded as illustratio11s 3, 8, 9 a11d 10 i11 the Master Site Plan or as otherwise required by the Ada COll11ty Hig11way District ("ACHD"). 2. 1. 1 8 Irrigation System. Subject to the approval of the NMID, Developer shall design and construct a pressurized irrigation systeln that NMID will own and operate. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 8 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( This system will cover all common area landscaping and private yard areas within t11e DevelopIue11t. 2.1. 190ther Irrigation and Drainage Ditches. With the exception of Five Mile Creek, all existing irrigation aI1d drail1age ditches crossing the property shall be tiled per City Ordina11ce 11-9-605.M or Developer shall provide an alter11ative delivery system. The ditches to be tiled and/or alternative delivery systems shall be shown on the preliminary plats. Plans must be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, as required by law, with writteI1 confirI11ation of the approval 5ubIl1itted to the Public W orl(5 Depart111ent. 2. 1. 2 o Existing Wells and Septic Systems. Existing domestic wells and lor septic syste1115 011 Parcel A lTIUSt be relTIoved frOITI dOll1estic service per City Ordil1aI1ce Section 5-7 -517. Existing wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as la11dscape irrigatio11. 2.1.21 Flood Plail1 Perlnits. Developer sl1all obtail1 any perl11its for Flood Plail1 Developlnel1t t11at are required by City ordi11al1ce per criteria outlined il1 the ordi11ance. 2.1.22Signage. Detailed signage plans will be subject to design review and separate per111its as required by the terlTIS of the Developlne11t Agreement a11d the approved C011ditiol1al Use Perll1it. 2.1.23Tras11 E11closures. Developer shall coordinate locatio11s a11d c011structio11 requirements for the community center trash enclosures with Meridian Sanitary Service, Inc. ("MSS"), and provide a letter of approval from MSS prior to applying for buildi11g perluits for the COlTIlTIUnity ce11ter. 2.1.24Phasing and Platting. Developer intends to build the Development in two or more phases. To commence the development of a phase, the Developer will SUb111it a plat application for the phase (or several p11ases or t11e e11tire DeveloplTIe11t as Developer deterlnines i11 its sole discretion). 2.1.25Infrastructure Installation in Conjunction with Plat. Developer will install the Infrastructure serving the phase as part of the phase, and will not record any ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 9 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( plats for subseque11t p11ases of tl1e Developn1e11t U11til the I11frastructure for the ongoing phase is completed. All Infrastructure for the Development shall be completed or bonded for completion in a manner generally consistent with the Master Site Plan in conjunction with the final phase of the Development, at the latest. 2.1.26Fencing Details in Plat. Each plat shall address fencing details for the portion of the Development covered by the plat. The perimeter fence shall be of a "good neighbor" design, i.e., the fence shall be of a quality appearance on both sides. 2.1.27 As-Built Drawings. For each phase, Developer shall comply with the requireluents of the Meridial1 City Code a11d duly adopted City Public W orl(s Standards and Specifications for submission and inspection of plans and as- built drawings for the Infrastructure, as well as the inspection of the c011structed I11frastructure. 2.1.28Incorporation into Development Agreement. These conditions of approval shall be incorporated into a Development Agreement to be approved by the City Council, which shall replace these conditions and the final Development Agreement and shall be the guiding document for assessing future plats in the Developluent. Provided, however, that the provisiol1S of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances shall continue to apply to the Development to the extent those provisions are not inconsistent with these conditions of approval. These C011ditio11S of approval a11d the Developlnel1t Agreelue11t shall act il1 lieu of subdivisiol1 or ZOl1il1g ordinance requiremel1ts that are il1consistel1t with these conditions in accordance with an approved planned development application, whether currently contained in the Meridian City Code or subsequently adopted. 3. The above conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application for a conditional use perl11it. 4. Notice to Perluit Holder, this COl1ditional use per111it is not tra11sferable without complying with the provisions of S 11-2-418 J of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, a copy of which is attached to this permit. ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 10 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( ( ~ action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the /B~ day of d~ ,'i 9992.iJoO.. ert D. Corrie, Mayor City of Meridia11 Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Departlne11t a11d City Attor11ey. By: City ClerIc Dated: /-18 -tJ{) msg/Z: \ W ork\M\Meridian 153 60M\ Woodbridge Conm1unity\CUPOrder - ..- ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PAGE 11 OF 11 WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, FOR 283-LOT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON 80.83 ACRES / CUP-99-037 ( RESOLUTION NO. -28?? BY: RI9?L ~f-S(hJ A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH CERTAIN PURPOSES, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERI( TO ENTER INTO A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES WITH SANITARY SERVICE, INC. TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN. Section I - Recitals: WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to enter into an agreement with Sanitary Service, Inc., denoted as "Franchise Agreement to Perform Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services" a copy of which is attached hereto marlced as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement. WHEREAS, the Council having duly enacted the Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Franchise Ordinance as set forth in Ordinance No. 853 which ordinance was duly published as required by the Idaho Code; and WHEREAS, the Council finding that the proposed Fra11chise Agreeme11t to PerfOrlTI Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services is in accordance with the City's ordinance and that Sanitary Service, Inc., is prepared to enter into such Franchise Agreement, which is subject to City of Meridian Solid Waste Collectio11 and Disposal Services Franchise Ordinance of the City of Meridian. Section 2: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOL YED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL as follows: A. The Mayor and ClerIc are hereby authorized to enter into on behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement entitled "franchise Agreement to Perform Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services" and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. / \ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /g~ dayof ~~a.4-VL ,2000. c7 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /131'1:- day of J~CVL':t- ,2000. (j ATTEST: lTISglZ:\ W ork\M\Iv1eridian 15360M\SW AAOFranchiseAgmt.Res ( (- CERTIFICATE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN 1, the undersigned, do hereby certify: 1. That I am the duly appointed and elected Clerk of the City of Meridian, a duly incorporated City operating under the laws of the State of Idaho, with its principal office at 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. 2. That as the City Clerk of this City, I am the custodian of its records and minutes and do hereby certify that on the / 8~ day of J7dhtla~ ,2000, the following action has been taken as Resolutio 0.265 and authorized: A RESOLUTION SETTING FORTH CERTAIN PURPOSES, AUTHORIZING THE MAYORAND CITY CLERK TO ENTER INTO A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT TO PERFORM SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES WITH SANITARY SERVICE, INC. TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN. Section I - Recitals: WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to enter into an agreement with Sanitary Service, Inc., denoted as "Franchise Agreement to Perform Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services" a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement. WHEREAS, the Council having duly enacted the Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Franchise Ordinance as set forth in Ordinance No. B53 which ordinance was duly published as required by the Idaho Code; and WHEREAS, the Council finding that the proposed Franchise Agreement to Perform Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services is in accordance with the City's ordinance and that Sanitary Service, Inc., is prepared to enter into such Franchise Agreement, which is subject to City of Meridian Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services Franchise Ordinance of the City of MeridIan. CERTIFICATE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 1 (' Section 2: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE lvlAYOR AND eIn COUNCIL as follows: A. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into on behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement entitled "Franchise Agreement to Perform Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Services" and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. \\t\{H'''II/ 1J\\\'Qf ~~l:-~'IIIIII ,~ -l 'wc, I~ " ~" ~.I'''''''' ~'(j' 'i' ~ ~ -..a.P(")Q A ~ ~ :p!..J'~ -.. ~ .,..~ -;. ~ ~a ~ , - E = :: SEAL :: ; ~ & ~ILLIAM G. BERG, J \. 1'; ~l.t-i 1~ . "QJ P .;-2cIn CLERK " ~..., t.<' ~ .....' ~'" ~ ,v' "" STATE OF IDAHO~.f/~J'I' \;,\\\\'\' III HI uU : ss: County of Ada, On this Ift/h.'day of ~t;-, in the year 2000, before me, ;;.~/~ t:. ~tLrn za ./ , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.; knoor identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian. (SEAL) ....... .. -c tJ.. .. ~ ~:.---9 .. .~~OTA ~~~... .r;.-./ ~ .~A \ .. .~I \ . :~: d.. * * \N- . CI:1. ll(" I~ . . ' ,~. . \ / . 0. \ I . . ' .)::;,.. --- . '. ..~~~~~}S~o... ~.;.e-OFIP ... ....... op. NO~ic for Idaho Commission Expires: q /Zb/ trO msglZ:\ W ork\M\Meridian 15360M\SW AAOCertifClerkFranAgmt.Res CERTIFICATE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 2 fiJClGT:j ~,LlJ JAN 2 6 2000 CITi-i Ofi1 IVllihluwJ RESOLUTION NO. 2Bq BY: ;fe/tA. /J/rd- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLEl)";~NTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE /5"+- DAY OF Ochh&v- ,~, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND LYND HOOVER, PRESIDENT - LYND INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best i11terest of the City of Meridia11 to e11ter into a11 agreeluent with LYND HOOVER, PRESIDENT - LYND INC., de110ted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy ofwl1ich is attached hereto rnarlced as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons a11d authority for which are as set forth i11 said Agree111ent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: I. The Mayor and ClerIc are hereby authorized to enter into a11d 011 bel1alf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with LYND HOOVERJRESIDENT - LYND INC., entiJJ;.a;;CONTRACT FOR SERVICES" dated the I uy day of tJc--f7;~ ,..!ilJM, by and between the City of Meridian and LYND HOOVER, PRESIDENT - L YND INC., a copy of whicl1 is attached hereto luarlced as Exhibit "A" to this Resolutio11 a11d to bi11d tl1is City to its terlTIS a11d C011ditio11S. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 1 OF 2 WITH LYND HOOVER, PRESIDENT - LYND INC. ( PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /Sf& day of dd/1,tfA.~ ,2000. APP~VED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this If}-I. day ofJ(Vl/l./ka.A() ,2000. SEAL ::. ~ &::.: -; Qf "C5 0 ~': ~."o U&r 1S\ ' X" $ ~ ,....;' ~ to;..: ,~ .......... .,. C' 'f"~' " .....1,,/ '\. OUr ~:-'l. -/..\\" "'111 . '" .. \ \ \ \ ' lil..'!;i ~H'\'\ ATTEST: n1sglZ:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Public Works\CONTRACf FOR SERVICES\LYND.RES RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 2 OF 2 WITH LYND HOOVER, PRESIDENT - LYND INC. ( ( CER TIF! CA TE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN 1, the lt11dersigned, do hereby certify: 1. T11at I aln the duly appoil1ted al1d elected ClerIc of t11e City of Nleridiarl, a dltly incorporated City operatil1g lt11der the lavvs of the State of Ida11o, vvit11 its principal office at 33 East Ida11o, Meridia11, Ida11o. 2. That as the City ClerIc of t11is City, I am the Cllstodian of its records a11d minutes and do hereby certify that on the / &-4.. day of Ja,~./L.tj. , 2000, the following action has been taken and allthorized: (/ . A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AL'\JD PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLE~@NTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE I Sf;: DAY OF Oc,lo /1 .e/l-.-, , BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND L YND HOOVER, PRESIDENT- L YND INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian to enter into al1 agreement vvith LYND HOOVER, PRESIDENT- LYND INC., denoted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy ofvvhich is attached hereto marlced as Exhibit "A" to this Resolutio11, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth il1 said Agreelnent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follovvs: 1. The Mayor and Clerl( are hereby atlthorized to e11ter into and 011 behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreelnent with LYND HOOVER,.PRESIDENT- LYND INC., entitled "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES" dated the I Sp day of CERTIFICATE OF CLERIC OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 1 ( ( . . /199 tlc,Wber , 2000, by and between the City of Meridian and LYND HOOVER, l)RESIDENT - LYND INC., a copy ofvv11ic11 is attached 11ereto l11arl(ed as Ex11ibit HA" to t11is Resolution and to bind this City to its terlTIS and conditio11S. \\\\\ lJ" 111111 \ \ \ \ \ c: lA'J:"' ,...., 1/11 ,....."" '""\ Or "~~bL 11/1'// ," ~ '-'1A ~ ~ ~"C; o-t\POFtq ~ r y S ~ ~(J ~c ~ ~ ~ :: SEAL :: WILLIAM G. BERG, J CITY CLERIC ~ & ;'" ~u ,OJ 0 ::: % ~<) rs, 1S\ · ~.; ,/ ....~"t fV~ ,"- STATE OF IDARqPOUN",}( . '\ \\\\\\ '.,/ \\\\ I Ii 1 : U : I \ ~ ~ S's ~ COll11ty of Ada, ) 'h ~ {' . On this 'I rrf - day of JtlN.ltLrLj' , in the year 2000, before me, ?helb'1 t?~yn ~iv , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIANI G. BERG, JR., l<IlovVl1 or identified to Ine to be the City CIerI, of the City of Meridian, Ida110 that execllted the said instrument, and aclG10vvledged to me that he execllted the same on behalf of the City of Meridian. ....... · tJ -. ..~~:.----9 +.. ~. ~..." 0 TA ~'" .. ,,/;;1, ~ - """'t' J.. \ . .~,' ~ ~ \ . -::q/ * d.,.6.. \ · :00: ~ ~ : : . \ J . . \ I . .~ \. I · . u>>;..,!'t"-lC~~ .. . -r~ "':'~..BL ..' . . -: ~ .".;---_.. . ~.:,.l!OFtO .+ ....... msglZ:\Work\lV1\IVleridian 15360lv1\Public Works\CONTRACf FOR SERVICES\CertifClerkRes.L YND (SEAL) /(Ji1t;) Nota~blic for Idaho Commission Expires: 4 (20/ 00 CERTIFICATE OF CLERIC OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 2 . \ ( CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT Inade the 1st day of October, 1999, by and betvvee11 tl1e City of Meridia11, an Idaho lTIunicipal corporatio11, and L YND, INC., a lice11sed Plll111bing Inspector, located in Meridia11, Ida11o. The City of Meridia11, a ffill11icipal corporation duly organized a11d existi11g under the general municipallavvs of the State of Idaho, desires to retain the services of a Plumbing Inspector to serve the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian has adopted the Uniform Plu111bing Code, published by the I11ternational Association of Plulnbing and Mechanical Officials, for regulati11g the plu111bing of all building or structures in the City of Meridian. The code provides for issuance of permits and collection of fees therefor; each and all of the regulations, provisio11S, conditions and terlTIS of such UniforlTI Plulnbing Code and the Unifor111 Plun1bing Code Standards have been made a part of Title 7 of the Revised a11d Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. T11e Plumbing Inspector shall enforce all code regulations as specified in the aforementioned codes and any City Ordinance as they pertain to Plumbing matters. For and in C011sideration of the lTIutual promises contai11ed herein, the parties agree as follovvs: 1. That L YND Inc. 3420 Sugar Creelc, Meridia11, Idaho shall be the Plumbing Inspector for the City of Meridian, Idaho; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to LYND Inc. for services rendered shall be according to the value placed on the Plumbing pern1it, and based upon the follovving pay schedllle: A. 50% of the perlnit fees for the first $100,000 in permit fees collected annually. B. 40% of the perluit fees betvveen $100,000 to $200,000 i11 perlnit fees collected an11ually. C. 30% of the per111it fees over $200,000 in permit fees collected a11nually. AGREEMENT - 1 . :- ( 3. Upon permit reconciliatio11, if t11e nUluber of fi:xtures "vas ll11der reported then the Inspector shall receive 50% of the fees dLle up to a limit of five (5) additiol1al fixtllres. A11Y amOll11t beyo11d five (5) sl1all be negotiated by the I11spector a11d the Mayor. The Plulnbing I11spector is a11 independent contractor and not a11 e111ployee of the City of Meridian and shall be respo11sible for all insurances, vvorl(er's c0111pensatio11, t~~es, and shall fur11ish certificates for each e111ployee to the City of Meridian. The term of this contract shall be one year commencing on October 1, 1999, until October 1, 2000, and shall continue frOITI year to year until ternlinated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terlninated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of termination to the other party. Termination Inay be made vvithout cause. APPROVED: 1-/tl-tJO I:fJ APPROVED by City COll11Cil --- OBERT D. CORRlE NlAYOR - CITY OF MERIDIAN ,~/ ;;?~~ if LYND HOOVER PRESIDENT - L YND INC. ATTEST: AGREEMENT - 2 ( ,:": ._j~~ ,r-,~ ~r.-4-l,- : ,- -'. r\1pL/~ 1,1 ,.1. , ~ ~/ ~ -~ :,; ~'-'~J ":L J JAN 2 6 2000 CITY OF IVllitllDL4N RESOLUTION NO. 2Qo BY: ;!el-r"- ~lrd- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLE~iiONTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE-'.!f DAY OF OcIV6e;-, , BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian to e11ter into a11 agreemellt with HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC., denoted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy of which is attac11ed l1ereto luarl<.ed as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reaS011S and authority for which are as set forth ill said Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: I. The Mayor and Clerl<. are hereby authorized to enter into a1ld 011 behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreelTIellt with HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC., e11ti;tJ;J}";'CONTRACT FOR SERVICES" dated the I 09 day of tl~6ef- ,~ by and between the City of Meridiarl a11d HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., IN C., a copy of which is attached hereto marl(ed as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and to bind this City to its terlTIS and C011ditiol1S. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE I OF 2 WITH HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this / tJA day of da/UlCVlvj., 2000. (/ APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 113ft. day of ~~if-' 2000. 1a)17[) C~~ MAYOR ATTEST: \ \ t\\ , -lll f , , , 't! ~\\ t': lAt:.r. III/ ,''''....f o~ .w~tl~ I~;,)' ,'- ~, v~ ..., ~' (j~ .-100"1;) A - TAt__ ~ ..:-- Qru I Vi h '"Y ~ ~ ~G ~A .-:.,. ::: ~ v ~ ~ ~ - ~ : ~ ~ - ~ - . - - , msglZ:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Public Works\CONTRACT FOR SERVICES\HAROLDS.RES RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 2 OF 2 WITH HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC. ( CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT Inade the 1 st day of October, 1999, by and betvveen tl1e City of Meridia11, al1 Idaho l11Ul1icipal corporation, and HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC., a licel1sed Electrical Il1spector, located i11 Meridian, Idaho. The City of Meridian, a municipal corporation duly organized al1d existi11g under the general nlunicipallaws of the State of Idaho, desires to retain the services of an Electrical Inspector to serve the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian has adopted the National Electrical Code, pllblished by the National Fire Protection Associatiol1, for regulating t11e installation of electrical service in all buildings or structures in the City. The code provides for issuance of pern1its and collection of fees therefor; each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and tern1S of such National Electrical Code and the Natiol1al Electrical Code Standards have been made a part of Title 7 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The Electrical Inspector shall enforce all code regulations as specified in the aforen1entioned codes and any City Ordinance as they pertain to electricallnatters. For and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. That Harold's Electric Co., Inc. 39 East State, Meridian, Idaho shall be the Electrical Inspector for the City of Meridian, Idal1o; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to Harold's Electric Co. Inc. for services rendered shall be according to the value placed on the electrical pern1it, and based upon the follovving pay schedule: A. 50% of all commercial per111it fees collected annllally. B. 50% of the residential per111it fees for the first $40,000 in perl11it fees collected annually. C. 40% of the residential per111it fees fron1 $40,000 on IIp in perlnit AGREEMENT - I ( fees collected annually. The Electrical Inspector is a11 i11dependent contractor and 110t an employee of the City of Meridian and s11all be respo11sible for all insurances, vvorI(er's con1pensation, tCL"Xes, and shall furnish certificates for each elnployee to the City of Meridian. The term of this contract shall be one year commencing on October 1, 1999, until October I, 2000, and s11all continue fr0111 year to year llntil terll1inated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of termination to the other party. Termination may be n1ade without cause. APPROVED: /-If3~tJo APPROVED by City Council /2f):;- BERT D. CORRIE MAYOR - CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~ /fr ~~--&-. HAROLD HUDSON PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO. INC. ATTEST: AGREEMENT - 2 . ( CERTIFICATE OF CLERIC OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN I, the ll11dersigned, do hereby certify: I. That I aln the duly appointed and elected ClerIc of the City of Meridian, a duly incorporated City operating u11der the laws of the State of Idaho, with its principal office at 33 East Idaho, Meridia11, Idal1o. 2. That as the City ClerIc of this City, I aln the custodian of its records a11d minutes and do hereby certify that on the I f)~ day of J~tf//lf ,2000, the following action has been taken and authorized: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLEI)'-;~i>NTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE /~ DAY OF t?c:1Z>6et- ,~, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is i11 the best interest of the City of Meridia11 to enter into an agreeme11t with HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC., de110ted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy of which is attached hereto Inarlced as Exhibit "A" to this Resolutiol1, the reasons a11d authority for which are as set forth in said Agreemel1t. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: 1. The Mayor and ClerIc are hereby authorized to enter i11to al1d on behalf of the City of Meridian that certai11 agreelne11t with HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC., entitled "CONTRACT FOR CERTIFICATE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 1 '51' - (qq9 SERVICES" dated the I 9 day of {!J~fv6.eJ- ,~ooe, by and between the City of Meridian and HAROLD HUDSON, PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC., a copy of which is attached hereto lnarl(ed as Exhibit "A" to tl1is Resolution all.d to bind this City to its terms and conditions. \\\\\tUfllI/J1 \. \ \ \ ftAl:" '" I J /1 ~,\.'..... Of ..~f""h..II// " ~ '"'\ '-Z ""? j:' c} ~.0It4 ~~ ~ (~- _ ~ .:: ~o ~ ". :::~. 0 ~ f - SEAL - ILLIAM G. BERG, ~ ~ & ff=ITY CLERI( .",..~ ,OJ ..... %~. ~r 15\ ' -P ! STATE OF IDAJ-f0 .;,syeo ,,("\~ ,,~ ~) v \'V " ,,\ 't \ ' \ '1// . c. \\\ II/lilh "1\\"\ County of Ada, ) ~ On this l ~-t!1 day of ~f'\LLtu...L8' ' in the year 2000, before me, ~~ e. Vf1tln11-~ , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known or identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, al1d aclmowledged to lne that he execllted the same on behalf of the City of Meridian. (SEAL) ...... .. U-. .. ~;?-.:.._--Q~... .~~OT~;~,~. :~/~ ~\ ~ ::Q' \ :(/): * * * i>: · \ J · . \ I . $ , I . · \..hr_ ~ C; · . \P~":' U1:J.L~ '~;" 0 . +. ~~---_... .. ~.-c~OFlP .. ........... - (OYV~ Notary Puo ic for Idaho Commission Expires: 4(Jfp( 00 n1sg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian I 5360M\Public Works\CONTRACf FOR SERVICES\CertifClerkRes.HAROLDS CERTIFICATE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 2 '.R.. .. -;---"lr-'1Ti' -,-~ i ;-t - - '- .. rt-1JvLLL v . i. 1 ,l b \J..s..- -Ci~.j A._Jl JAN 2 6 2000 CITY OF IVIElilDIAN RESOLUTION NO. Z q I BY: ~/If~ ~'rd- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLEI)~:'~pNTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE ~ DAY OF tJL:fv6.~ ,~, BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT- RIMI INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian to enter into a11 agree111ent with RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT- RIMI INC., denoted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy of which is attached hereto 111arl(ed as Exhibit "A" to this Resolutio11, the reasons and authority for which are as set fortl1 in said Agreelnent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: 1. The Mayor a11d Clerl( are hereby authorized to e11ter into a11d on bel1alf of the City of Meridia11 that certai11 agree111ent with RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT- RIMI INC., entitl,e~~~ONTRACT FOR SERVICES" dated the /S9 day of Cleft; 6~ ,~, by and between the City of Meridian and RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT- RIMI INC., a copy ofwhic11 is attached hereto luarlced as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution a11d to bind this City to its terms a11d conditions. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 1 OF 2 WITH RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT - RIMI, INC. /8.1J; PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this day of ~tl4~ ' 2000. ~PROVED BY TJ!E MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this ~ day of d~-~, 2000. (j ArrEST: msg/Z:\Work\M\Meridian I 5360M\Public Works\CONTRACT FOR SERVICES\RIMI INC.RES RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 2 OF 2 WITH RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT - RIMI, INC. CERTIFICATE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN I, the undersigned, do hereby certify: 1. Tl1at I a111 t11e dtlly appoi11ted a11d elected Clerl( of t11e City of Meridia11, a dllly i11corporated City operati11g ll11der the lavvs of the State of Idallo, vvit11 its pri11cipal office at 33 East Ida11o, Meridian, Idaho. 2. That as the City Clerl( of t11is City, I alTI the ctlstodian of its records alld minutes and do hereby certify that on the / gft::. day of .Ja-YUA-~L-''l'1 ' 2000, the following action has been taken and allthorized:( A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE NIAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT_ENTITLEI?;~QNTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE IS? DAY OF {}cfo6.e/f./ ,~ BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT- RIMI INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE lvlAYORAND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian to enter i11to an agreement with RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT- RIMI INC., denoted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy of which is attached hereto marl(ed as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE lvlAYORAND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: 1. The Mayor and Clerl( are hereby authorized to ente.r into and on behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with RODNEY L~ M~DLEY, PRESIDENT- RIMI INC., entitled "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES" dated the CER TIFI CA TE 0 F CLERIC 0 F THE CITY 0 F MERID IAN - 1 ( ( ! 5? day of tJ cl--p h-e--L- ,~~b~, by and between the City of Meridian and RODNEY L. MEDLEY, PRESIDENT- RIIvII INC., a copy of vvhich is attached hereto l11arl(ed as Exhibit "An to this Resollltion and to bind this City to its terl11S and co 11 di ti 0 ns. ,\ \" \ \, 'If f t, I f I "'1 ,'\\.\\..~t of L1E~'I;,,..,I " ~ '"'\ ..::... flUt4~ r" ~....' c} ~nD -A ~ vv ~--:.. ~ 00 -'~~ ~ ~ ~ <:> ~ ~ ~ - - - SE.llL = , : ss: COU11ty of Ada, ) ~ _ On this '"./. day of dzLf\-U D/1.,[.O ' in the year 2000, before me, ~e. 1?'. MYIU~ , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., lmown or id ntified to me to be the City Clerl( of the City of Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, and aclmowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian. -...... .- 11. tJ .... ,~.~'~~--~~~.. ;,t1 OTA ~', . !! -~ - "l't' ,. , · !l ~ r". a \ · ~' *** \N: ., .>. ::1 I . ~ 1 . ~ \ / ... :\~tro,~\Q~,.'o .. ,J~ ...;,~..___.... . ?~.~./:J~a 11> · , .... F... ..... msglZ:\Work\lVf\Meridian 1 5360M\Public Works\CONTRACT FOR SERVICES\CertifClerkRes,RIM (SEAL) NO~liC for Idaho, Commission Expires: q f 2b( 00 CER TIFI CA TE OF CLERI( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 2 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT Inade tl1e 1 st day of October, 1999, by and betvvee11 t11e City of Meridian, a11 Idaho l11unicipal corporation, and RIMI, INC., a licensed Mecl1a11ical I11spector, located i11 Meridian, Idaho. The City of Meridian, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing u11der tl1e general municipallavvs of the State of Idaho, desires to retai11 tl1e services of a Mechanical Inspector to serve the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian has adopted the Uniform Mechanical Code, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, for regulating the design, construction, quality of materials, erection, installation, alteration, repair, location, relocation, replacement, addition to, use or n1aintenance of heating, ve11tilating, cooling, refrigeration systems] incinerators, or other miscellaneous heat-producing appliances in the City of Meridian. The code provides for issuance of per111its and collection of fees therefor; each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of such Uniform Mecha11ical Code and the Uniform Mechanical Code Standards have been made a part of Title 7 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The Mechanical Inspector shall enforce all code regulations as specified i11 the aforementioned codes and any City Ordinance as they pertain to Mecha11ical matters. For and in C011sideration of the mutual prolnises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. That RIMI Inc. 479 Sa Spoonbill Ave.] Meridian, Idaho shall be the Mechanical Inspector for the City of Meridian] Idaho; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to RIMI Inc. for services rendered shall be according to the value placed on the Mechanical permit, and based 1-tpon the following pay schedule: A. 75% of the perluit fees for the first $30,000 in per111it fees collected annually. B. 60% of the permit fees betvveen $30,000 to $45,000 in permit fees collected annually. AGREEMENT - 1 C. 50% of the perlnit fees betvveen $45,000 to $60,000 i11 perluit fees collected annually. D. 40% of the perlnit fees between $60,000 to $75,000 in perll1it fees collected annually. E. 40% of the pern1it fees over $ 75,000 in pern1it fees collected annually. 3. The perInit fee of a vallIe of $1,000.00 or more shall be negotiable betvveen the City of Meridian and the MechaI1ical Inspector. The Mechanical Inspector is an independent contractor and not an e111ployee of the City of Meridian and shall be responsible for all insurances, vvorl(er's compensation, taxes, and shall furnish certificates for each employee to the City of Meridian. The tern1 of this contract shall be one year commencing on October I, 1999, until October I, 2000, and shall continue from year to year until terlninated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of terlnination to the other party. Termination may be made without cause. /-;8-00 APPROVED by City Council;t;;)J -- APPROVED: ERT D. CORRIE MAYOR - CITY OF MERIDIAN RODNEY L. EDL. PRESIDENT - RIMI INC. ey/ A:\lY1echanicaIRlMI .Agr ATTEST: J!~~fi~/9- WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CITY CLERIC - CITY 0 F MERID IAN AGREEMENT - 2 ( 'R" r. -,--;' """---i -,::;"1 -, , \,~t?...J ~.2-. ,c'';> ~<~,) -!L21 JAN 2 6 2000 Clll'y OjT IVllitilDIA1'J RESOLUTION NO. 2-92. BY: !C(!/flu t3if-tL- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLED ilONTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE --.L.!P DAY OF t/c;,h?be-r- ,~ ,BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND DAUNT WHITMAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is i11 the best interest of the City of Meridian to enter i11tO a11 agreelnent with DAUNT WHITMAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC., de110ted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy ofvvhicl1 is attached hereto Inarl(ed as Exhibit HA" to this Resolutio11, the reaS011S a11d authority for which are as set forth in said Agreelnent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: I. Tl1e Mayor a11d ClerIc are hereby allthorized to enter i11to a11d 011 bel1alf of tl1e City of Meridiarl that certai11 agreelne11t with DAUNT WHITMAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITMAN &ASSOCIATE?, INC., ~JJ>J!Jed "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES" dated the / Sp day of Ocf~2.b~ ,~ by and between the City of Meridian and DAUNT WHITMAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC., a copy of which is attached hereto marl(ed as Exhibit "A" to t11is Resolution a11d to bind this City to its terlns and conditions. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 1 OF 2 WITH DAUNT WHITMAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITMAN &ASSOCIATES, INC. ( ( PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /(3& day of ~~ ,2000. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 1f3~ day of J~-Wl.-'1- ,2000. (f - ..... Insg/Z:\ W ork\M\lY1eridian 1 5360M\Public W orks\CONTRACT FOR SER VICES\WHITMAN &ASSOCIATES .RES RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 2 OF 2 WITH DAUNT WHITMAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITMAN &ASSOCIATES, INC. (-. .( CERTIFICATE OF CLERl( OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN I, the u11dersigned, do hereby certify: I. That I alTI the dl.tly appoi11ted a11d elected Clerl( of the City of Meridia11, a dl.lly incorporated City operating l.lnder the lavvs of the State of Ida11o, vvit11 its principal office at 33 East Idaho, Meridia11, Idaho. 2. That as the City Clerl( of this City, I am the Cl.Istodian of its records a11d minutes and do hereby certify that on the / g;-~ day of ..;r~vt ,2000, the following action has been taken and alIthorizecf' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE NlAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLEI? ;~.QNTRACT FOR SERVICES", DATED THE / S? DAY OF ()Gh>6~ ,~BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDlAl'\J AND DAUNT WHITNlAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITNlAN &ASSOCIATES, INC. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE NlAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the City of Meridian to enter into an agreement vvith DAUNT WHITNlAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITNlAN & ASSOCIATES, INC., denoted as "CONTRACT FOR SERVICES", a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE NlAYORAND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: I. The Mayor and Clerl( are hereby authorized to enter into and 011 behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreen1ent with DAUNT WHITNlAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITNlAN &ASSOCIATES, INC., entitled "CONTRACT FOR CERTIFICATE OF CLERIC OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 1 (r \ . /qrq SERVICES" dated the / Sf day of tJc.l?;1bt~, 2000, by and between the City of Meridia11 a11d DAUNT vVHITMAN, PRESIDENT OF WHITNLAN & ASSOCIATES, INC., a copy of vvhich is attached hereto 111arl(ed as Exl1ibit "A" to t11is Resollltio11 and to bi11d t11is City to its terms and C011ditio11S. -\ \'1~\.tlnl"'I' I ~, III \,-\ ~ Ul:~~' /'1 ",~ ~ u' = ~ J"J'.;~ .::~' 8'_aPOR.ct ~,.~ h/ " cP'~ ~ ~ I. ~ /' ~ f ~ 0 ~ ~/~j)?uh ~ SEAL WILLWv1 G. BERG, ni \..,,~ ,cf .0 lCITY CLERI( ~;'A ?<sr 1~ ~ ~ $' ......... ~...... 'b ..... ...../ ....., ~' ~ " STATE OF IDAH(}/I'r, C'oU}ff'C. \\"", '1IIiI:i"~.l',q,'\\\ q.;\SS~ COltnty of Ada, ) On this _I'clb day of ~LC0rVO' in the year 2000, before me, ~l~ 12. L.lACurn2..tV- , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known or i~tified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho t11at executed the said instrument, and acl<.novvledged to me that he executed the sa111e on behalf of the City of Meridian. (SEAL) (0i. Notary ~liC for Idaho Commission Expires: &f /1b I DO msglZ:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Public Works\CONTRACT FOR SERVICES\CertifClerkRes,Wht CER TIFI CA TE OF CLERI( 0 F THE CITY 0 F MERID IAN - 2 ( l C. CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT lnade the 1 st day of October, 1999, by a11d betvveen t11e City of Meridian, an Idaho nlunicipal corporation, and WHITMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC., a licensed Building Inspector, located in Boise, Idal1o. The City of Meridian, a ffiltnicipal corporation duly organized and existing u11der the general lTIunicipal lavvs of the State of Idaho, desires to retain the services of a Building Inspector to serve the City of Meridian. The City of Meridia11 has adopted the Uniform Building Code, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, for regulating the erection, construction, conversion, occupancy, equipping, use, height, area and Inainte11ance of all buildings or structures in the City. The code provides for issuance of permits a11d collection of fees therefor; and each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of such Uniform Building Code and the Uniform Building Code Standards have been made a part of Title 7 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The Building Inspector shall enforce all code regulations as specified in the aforementioned codes and any City Ordinance as they pertain to building matters and shall include all inspections for occupancy. For and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. That Whitman & Associates, Inc. 284 Oal<.hurst Way, Boise, Idaho shall be the Building Official for the City of Meridian, Idaho; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to Whitman & Associates Inc. shall be according to the value placed on the building pern1it and based Up011 the following pay schedule: A. 50% of the permit fees for the first $30,000 in pern1it fees collected annually. B. 40% of the permit fees betvveen $30,000 to $50,000 il1 per111it fees collected annually. AGREEMENT - 1 ( c. 30% of t11e per111it fees betvveen $50,000 to $75,000 ill per111it fees collected annually. D. 25% of the permit fees over $75,000 in perll1it fees collected annually. 3. The per111it fee for a11Y structllre of a value of $500,000 or l1lore sllall be 11egotiable between the City of Meridia11 a11d tl1e Bllilding Inspector. 4. 85% of reinspectio11 fees collected. The Building Inspector is an i1ldependent contractor alld not an elnployee of the City of Meridian and shall be responsible for all insurances, worl<.er's c0111pensation, taxes, and shall furnish certificates for each employee to the City of Meridian. The ter111 of this COlltract shall be 011e year C0111111encing on October 1, 1999, Llntil October 1, 2000, and shall continue fro111 year to year u11til ter111illated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of termination to the other party. Termination Inay be made vvithout cause. APPROVED: 1-/8.-00 ~ APPROVED by City Council BERT D. CORRIE MAYOR - CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~\~ ~ \.. ~ DAUNT WHITMAN PRESIDENT - WHITMAN &ASSOC. INC. ATTEST: ey/Z:\ W ork\M\Meridian 153 60M\BldgServWhi tman.Agr AGREEMENT - 2 RESOLUTION NO. 281 BY: K'e/flt 15rf-cL A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT", BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC, OWNER. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to enter into an agreement with SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC, denoted as "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT", a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into and on behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC;) entitled ~'DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT", by and between the City of Meridian and SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC, a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /gt'1- day of Jah.fA-Ci./L.-:J ' 2000. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 1 OF 2 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC (AZ 99-020) ( APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /8-f!L day of ~ t1/Y1.. fA...~j , 2000. A TrEST: \\\"tilt.f"11111 \,\,\ f l,A~ 1111 ,,~'\...J 0 1nt;;.1fi"A 11~;1 " ~~ v~ ~ $''' 6 QlW0fi4 - '4- % .:: ~O ~ ..;. .:: ~ v ~ ~ ~ :: ~ - ~ - - - - - - msg/Z: \ Work\M\Meridian 15360M\ Woodbridge Co rmnu nity \ SNORTING. RES RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - PAGE 2 OF 2 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC (AZ 99-020) . . , C"' ( CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN I, the undersigned, do hereby certify: 1. That I am the duly appointed and elected Clerk of the City of Meridian, a duly incorporated City operating under the laws of the State of Idaho, with its principal office at 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. 2. That as the City Clerk of this Ci~ J am the custodian of its records and minutes and do hereby certify that on the / g ..! day of Qa~tUt ' 2000, the following action has been taken and authofized: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLED ''DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT', BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC, OWNER. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to enter into an agreement with SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC, denoted as "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT", a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reas9ns and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into and on behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC, entitled "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT', by and between the City of Meridian and SNORTING BULL INVESTMENTS, LLC, a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. ( RESOLUTION NO. 28B BY: ICe I fA ~lrcL A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "DEVEWPMENT AGREEMENT", BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, DEVEWPER. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to enter into an agreement with WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, denoted as "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT", a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement.. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: 1.. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into and on behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY:) LLC:) entitled c'DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT':), by and between the City of Meridian and WOODBRIDGE COM1\1UNITY:) LLC:) a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit CCA" to this Resolution and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this I gti. day of ~~ ,2000. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this I g-t& day of ~~'7 ' 2000. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO - PAGE 1 OF 2 ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC (AZ-99-020) \\nt\u,nt'II, ,'I....,\:~\ Of ~"Ifl"" ,",.~ "' ~ ~'u- ~aPOb... . ~ ~ . ~GV~ -..,.,~_ ~ :: ~ '() ~ i ~ ~ SEAL ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,OJoR g ~ . ~ ~ "'0 r 1S~ ' $" "-, :,y .<'\ t:t- " ~ ~"._ 'v ~ ~;'Jj ,-VUNT'l. \,\", IIIlillOB un\\\\" A TIEST: msgjZ: \ Work\M\Meridian 15360M\ Woodbridge Community\RESOLUTION RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO - PAGE 2 OF 2 - ENTER INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH WOODBRIDGE COM1v1UNITY:t LLC (AZ-99-020) CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN I, the undersigned, do hereby certify: 1. That I am the duly appointed and elected Clerk of the City of Meridi~ a duly incorporated City operating under the laws of the State of Idaho, with its principal office at 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho. 2. That as the City Clerk oftms City, I am the custodian of its records and minutes and do hereby certify that on the / g-f!:: day of ~ /u,:l/VL.r{". , 2000, the following action has been taken and authorized: (J A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETIING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT ENTITLED "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT", BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, DEVELOPER. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO: WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to enter into an agreement with WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, denoted as "DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT", a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL, as follows: 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into and on behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with WOODBRIDGE CO~TY, LLC, entitled "DEVELOP1ffiNT AGREE1\1ENT~", by and between the City of Meridian and WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC, a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. ( STATE OF IDAHO, ) : SSe County of Ada, ) (~'h On th~~~~tb ~ay of :I:r\.v..tVr~ ' in the year 2000, before me, (j e.t~ t ----11~y' 2/JJ , a Notary Public, appeared WILLIAM G. BER " JR., kn wn or identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho, that executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian. N~bliC for Idaho Commission Expires: q f ()ltJ l (JO (SEAL) ....... .. ~ f.J -.. ..~ ....-:.--....9~.. . ;.0... ,... TA ~, .~v," 0- "..cr" .. .ro-,..,/ ~ ~ \ . -;:;::, \ . .~I * 'N- :CI)~ * *' :>: . \ I . . \ / . .. \ ~- . ,'. ..~~~~~}S~<;..O ~.-c~OF1P .. ........ msg/Z: \ Work\M\Meridian 15360M\ Woodbridge Community \ CERTofCLKforRESOLU interoffice MEMORANDUM To: William G. Berg, Jr. RECEIV~D JAN 1 4 2000 CIT-Y OF IVlERIDIA-N From: Marlel1e St. Georg' Subject: Meridian Library Dist1ict Appeal (AP-99-007) Date: January 14, 2000 Will: Pllrsua11t to Mr. R011 Harrold's fax to YOll pertai11ing to the Meridia11 Library District's Sig11 appeal, please find attached the revised Order Granting Appeal in the Meridian Library District appeal. The revision pertain to Ron Harrold's fax to YOll dated 1-13-00. T11erefore, please replace this revised Order wit11 a11Y other Orders in the Meridia11 Library District. If you need a11ything further please advise. InsglZ:\ W ork\M\Meridian 153 60M\Meridian Library Appeal Sign Penni t\BergO 1 0500 .Men1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIANS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF SIGN PERMIT FOR THE MERIDIAN LIBRARY LOCATED AT 1326 W. CHERRY LANE, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO: AP-99-007 ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVER-RULING OF PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF MONUMENT SIGN WITH MESSAGE CENTER FOR THE MERIDIAN LIBRARY DISTRICT AND ORDER OF REMAND Tl1is Inatter COll1i11g before the City Cou11cil 011 Dece1nber 21, 1999, at 7 :30 p.lTI., Up011 the appeal of the Meridian Library District, by and through its represe11tative, AIM Sign Compa11Y, Inc., a11d the Cou11cil havi11g received the Appeal Application for1u, and the record i11 this lllatter, and havi11g l1eard the argu111e11ts a11d prese11tatio11 of Shari Stiles, the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Ad1uinistrator, a11d appearing 011 behalf of the Applica11t, Ron Harold, represe11tative of AIM Sign C01upany, Inc., and Patricia You11ger, frOlTI the Meridian Library District, a11d being fully advised in the prelnises issues the followi11g Fi11di11gS of Fact and Conclusio11S of Law and Decisio11 and Order: ORDER GRANTING APPEAL OVER-RULING OF PLANNING - PAGE 1 OF 5 AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF MONUMENT SIGN WITH MESSAGE CENTER FOR THE MERIDIAN LIBRARY DISTRICT AND ORDER OF REMAND FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Meridian Library District sublnitted for approval, to the Plan11ing and Zoning Adlninistrator, a sign as depicted in AIM Sign Company, I11C. Design Approval, Job Na1ne MERIDIAN LIBRARY, dated 12-16-99, Site Pla11 Scale 1/2" = 1 '0". 2. The Planning and Zoning Adlninistrator's office denied the Electro11ic Message Center portion of the proposed sign upon the basis that it violated the provision of S 11-2-415 C paragraph 7 of the Municipal Code, which prohibits Sig11S i11 all districts, except as otherwise provided by ordina11ce with "flashing lights or strobe lights of a11Y color". 3. The Meridian Library District, through its represe11tative, AIM Sign COlnpany, II1C., tiluely filed an appeal of the Ad1nil1istrator's deter1ui11atio11 a11d decisio11 for hearing before the City Cou11cil. 4. The Meridia11 Library District has agreed to tllr11 the lnessage ce11ter off when the Library is closed and to use the system, which will be used for the Electronic Message Ce11ter, is a Sunspot M011ochrolne 1600 Series Outdoor Incal1desce11t, which elnits very little light, and will be a clear colored systeln, and will 110t use the "flash" 111essage systelTI display. ORDER GRANTING APPEAL OVER-RULING OF PLANNING - PAGE 2 OF 5 AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF MONUMENT SIGN WITH MESSAGE CENTER FOR THE MERIDIAN LIBRARY DISTRICT AND ORDER OF REMAND /- { ( 5. Subject to the conditio11s of Fi11di11g no. 4, herei11, the proposed Electronic Message Center is not a "flashing ligl1ts or strobe lights" prol1ibited sigI1, a11d therefore the decision of the Adlninistrator of de11ial is over-ruled. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian has duly e11acted the followi11g ordina11ce provisions regulating signs as follows: 1.1 The activities a11d types of signs shall be expressly prohibited i11 all districts except as otherwise provided by this Ordina11ce. 1.2 Flasl1i11g lights or strobe lights of a11Y color. 2. The City ordinances provide at 9 11-2-404 D 1 a of tl1e MU11icipal Code for an appeal, hearing and review by the City Council of a11 order, requirelnent, decision, i11terpretation or deter1nination by the Plan11ing and Zoning Administrator. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVER-RULING OF PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF ELECTRONIC MESSAGE CENTER PORTION OF MERIDIAN LIBRARY DISTRICT SIGN AND ORDER OF REMAND Based upon the above a11d foregoi11g Fi11dings of Fact and Conclusions of Law IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND THIS DOES ORDER THAT: 1. The decision of the Plan11ing a11d Zoni11g Admi11istrator of de11ial of the ORDER GRANTING APPEAL OVER-RULING OF PLANNING - PAGE 3 OF 5 AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF MONUMENT SIGN WITH MESSAGE CENTER FOR THE MERIDIAN LIBRARY DISTRICT AND ORDER OF REMAND ( Electro11ic Message Center portion of the proposed sign Up011 the basis tl1at it violated the provision of S 11-2-415 C paragraph 7 of the Municipal Code, which prohibit Sigl1S i11 all districts except as otherwise provided by ordina11ce with: "Flashing lights al1d strobe lights of al1Y color", is over-ruled Up011 the c011dition that the Meridia11 Library District has agreed to turn the 1nessage ce11ter off whe11 the Library is closed and to use the syste1n, which will be used for the Electronic Message Center, a Sunspot M011ochro1ne 1600 Series Outdoor Incandesce11t, which elTIits very little light, and will be a clear colored syste1TI, a11d will 110t involve the use the "flash" message system display and otherwise is in accordance with the prese11tatio11 and dilnensions as depicted in AIM SigI1 COlnpal1Y, I11C. Design Approval, Job NalTIe MERIDIAN LIBRARY, dated 12-16-99, Site Plan Scale 1/2" == 1'0" . 2. This matter is remanded to the Plan11ing a11d Z011ing Administrator for further actio11 il1 accorda11ce with this decisio11. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please talce 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 perso11 being a person who has a11 interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the de11ial of the appeal may withirt twe11ty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision a11d ORDER GRANTING APPEAL OVER-RULING OF PLANNING - PAGE 4 OF 5 AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF MONUMENT SIGN WITH MESSAGE CENTER FOR THE MERIDIAN LIBRARY DISTRICT AND ORDER OF REMAND ( ( order seel( a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the ~ day of d?t~t ROLL CALL: 2oClc) COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED fletJc- COUNCILMAN deWEERD VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN McCANDLESS VOTED ~ MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAI(ER) VOTED DATED: 1-4-tf}tJ MOTION: ~ APPROVED:Jk{J;:) =: DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Z011ing Department, Public W orles Depart1ner a11d the City Attor11ey. ,\"l\"u.n"f'J/11 ,~,~~ Of ME.~?-..~II/~~ I Lf ~ A.~ Vl'A ~, B D d /)?J ~'CJ~'~" ~7A"" ~ y: ate: -- .-- C/ l/ ~ OP' -'Vfr~ ry ~ ity Clerk : <> % msglZ:\Work\M\Meridian 15360M\Meridian Library Appeal Sign permit\ORDERGrantingAppealOver-;ling. ZDenasEAL ~ ;. . f?_ :. ~ (be, ORDER GRANTING APPEAL OVER-RULING OF PLANNING - pk~ rSts"i ." .j? j AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF MONUMENT ~~,~,,; COUNT'l . ~\\\"", SIGN WITH MESSAGE CENTER FOR THE MERIDIAN QII"Jt;;Hl nH\\\\\\ LIBRARY DISTRICT AND ORDER OF REMAND January 14, 2000 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 18,2000 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: / 2- C ~ REQUEST: MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPOINTMENT AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: ~,;y./. l/~ 1Y (J {uf SJ;~t CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( \ January 14, 2000 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 18, 2000 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:P t L REQUEST: MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE - PARKS AND RECREATION COMMmEE APPOINTMENT AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: r iJ jV ytflV 0- [)Iff ~ ~ SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. January 14, 2000 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 18.2000 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:~ l2:A_ L REQUEST: MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE - COMPASS REPRESENTATIVE FROM CITY COUNCIL AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: cJv} 1{);~F~ rur j1-~ ~,// MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. (' January 14, 2000 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 18,2000 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:~Lz. e I REQUEST: CITY ENGINEER, GARY SMITH - MIKE LUKE REQUEST TO CONNECT TO CITY SEWER AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: IDAHO POWER: ~r flrl ;.~l ~~utu If. 0 1J~ to J; 'vl ~h _ ~.vv j-~ fvV~ _~{)r u Cfi01 !Jff ~lW.J or ~Ioffvv ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Memo To: Mayor Corrie From: Gary D. Smith, PE CC: file Date: 01/13/00 Re: Mike Luke Request to Connect to City Se'Ner Mayor: Mr. Luke lives in the Country Terrace Subdivision, which is not within current city limits. When this subdivision was constructed in 1977-78, the developer installed a dry sanitary sewer line that slopes from the Overland Road entrance to this subdivision, to it's south boundary. When Running Brook Estates Subdivision was developed, I required the developer to extend a sanitary sewer line from his development and connect it to the dry sewer line in the Country Terrace Subdivision. I made this request, to which the developer complied, because this was the only way the Country Terrace Subdivision could be served in the future. It appears that the future is now. I have talked with Mr. Luke about the presence of this dry line and that to the best of my knowledge, the line presently belongs to his subdivision's Homeowners Association. I have also talked to our Public Works Superintendent about this sewer fine and he believes that we have done a camera survey of it and he is researching his files to make sure. I have also talked to the Central District Health Department and they, of course, want to see Mr. Luke connect to the sanitary sewer and abandon his septic system. I agree that this is the alternative that should be followed. How the approval is made to allow Mr. Luke's connection is a matter of discussion. The altematives, as I see them are: 1. Allow Mr. Luke to connect, with the sewer lines in his subdivision remaining in the ownership of the Homeovvner's Association. 2. Allow Mr. Luke to connect, with the sewer lines being donated to the City of Meridian for ownership and maintenance, once it is detennined that they are in good condition. From the desk of... Gaty D. Smith, PE Meridian City Engineer Meridian Public Works Deparbnent 200 E. Carlton 51., Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642-2600 . Page 1 (208) 887-2211 Fax: (208) 887-1297 3. Allow Mr. Luke to connect with a request to the owners of homes in this subdivision to request annexation into the City of Meridian. As Mr. Luke points out in his letter, there are other homes in this subdivision that are, or have been, having problems with their septic systems. Mr. Luke indicated to me on the telephone that perhaps 50% of the residents would be in favor of annexation. At any rate, I think it is appropriate to allow Mr. Luke to connect to the existing dry line sewer system in his subdivision. There is a bit of urgency in Mr. Luke's request so I would assume that if at all possible, this should be brought before the City Council at their January 18 meeting. Regards, Gary . Page 2 l ' I f \ ~. l1ECltll1JtD JAN 1 1 2 1Ia4.~ ' 000 efT - OilS 0 1'" OF 1i PJ;lC~ ~ltI1:Jf.tW 1-10-00 TO~ Mayor/Merrdian- City- Council FR: Mike Luke 1-867 Country Terrace- Wy. Meridian, Idaho 83642 Ph~ 888-9290- VVk. 375-3762 RE: Connecting to City Sewer My septic tank was- pumped- out-Dee: 22nd-1-999- and- nowwe- have- noticed sitttng- water throughout the yard and overflow entering the gutter, including the odor. Master Rooter has said that our drain lines have-crystalized and would need- to- be- replaced. They al-so- stated that the other home- owners- in our subdivision are also having problems. One for example, has to pump every four months. Nowithas been Drought to my- attentioR-tRat there is a-city- sewer line in front of my home, and-I- WQuld like to connect in to it. Apparently with in 300ft. of my property there is a connection stub, which was installed there-when-a- new subdivision went- in- next to us. I have talked to Mike Reno and Ivan Butterfield of Ada County and they both said I should be talking to Meridian Public VVorks. So, talking-with Gar)'- Smith he said-I- need- to-send a letter too_you, and- that he would follow up with more information. I would appreciate your attention- to- this matter and to whatever can be done. Thank you for your time. RECEIVED Jr ;'d 1 3 2000 Mt:t1IU.AN CITY ~NGINEER J7. ~. fiP{JdM /' J~ (!J~~ ~M vr /lAt4ftj/)) . . :. ." --:l/lvv. t?ff . > .'. , . ",' January 14, 2000 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 18;0 2000 APPLICANT: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: H REQUEST: GARY SMITH - BUILDING INSPECTORS - CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED MEMO CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: vy 01 r0l SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( City of Meridian Public Works Dept. Memo To: Mayor Corrie From: Gary D. Smith, PE CC: file Date: 01/05/00 Re: Building Inspectors - Contract for Services Mayor: Here is an original signed copy of the Contract for Services for each of our four (4) building inspectors. Each of these contracts contains the same provisions as last year's edition. Only the dates have been changed to reflect the current fiscal year. I would appreciate it if you could place these Contracts on the next available City Council agenda for their review and approval. If you have any questions please give me a calL From the desk of. .. Gary D. Smith, PE Meridian City Engineer Meridian Public Works Department 200 E Carlton St., Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642-26aJ . Page 1 (208) 887-2211 Fax: (208) 887-1297 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT l11ade the 1 st day of October, 1999, by and betvvee11 tl1e City of Meridia11, a11 Idaho 111l1nicipal corporation, and HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO., INC., a lice11sed Electrical I11spector, located i11 Meridia11, Idaho. The City of Meridian, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the ge11eral n1unicipallaws of the State of Ida11o, desires to retain the services of an Electrical Inspector to serve the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian has adopted the National Electrical Code, published by the National Fire Protection Association, for regulating the installation of electrical selVice in all buildings or structures in the City. The code provides for issuance of pern1its and collection of fees therefor; each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions a11d terlTIS of such National Electrical Code and the National Electrical Code Standards have been made a part of Title 7 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. T11e Electrical Inspector shall enforce all code regulations as specified in the aforementioned codes and any City Ordinance as they pertain to electrical matters. For and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. That Harold's Electric Co., Inc. 39 East State, Meridian, Idaho s11all be the Electrical Inspector for the City of Meridian, Idaho; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to Harold's Electric Co. Inc. for selVices rendered shall be accordi11g to the value placed on the electrical permit, and based llpon the follovving pay schedule: A. 50% of all commercial per1nit fees collected annllally. B. 50% of the residential permit fees for the first $40,000 in permit fees collected annually. C. 40% of the residential permit fees from $40,000 on up in permit AGREEMENT - 1 fees collected annually. The Electrical Inspector is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City of Meridia11 and shall be respo11sible for all i11sl1ra11ces, vvorlcer's c0111pensation, tCL'Ces, and shall furnish certificates for each e111ployee to tl1e City of Meridia11. The ter1l1 of this contract shall be one year c01111ne11ci11g 011 October 1, 1999, until October 1, 2000, and shall continue fr0111 year to year ll11til ter1ninated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of termination to the other party. Termination may be made vvithout cause. APPROVED: APPROVED by City Council ROBERT D. CORRIE MAYOR - CITY OF MERID IAN ~~/lr~~~. HAROLD HUDSON PRESIDENT - HAROLD'S ELECTRIC CO. INC. ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CITY CLERI( - CITY OF MERIDIAN ey/Z:\W ork\IV1\M.eridian 15360M\ElectricHarolds.Agr AGREEMENT - 2 ( - { " . \ CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT l11ade the 1 st day of October, 1999, by a11d betvvee11 t11e City of Meridia11, a11 Ida110 l11unicipal corporation, a11d RIM!, INC., a licensed Mecha11ical I11spector, located i11 Meridian, Idaho. TIle City of Meridian, a 111unicipal corporation dllly organized a11d existing under the ge11eral ffilInicipallavvs of the State of Idaho, desires to retai11 the services of a Mechanical I11spector to serve the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian has adopted the Uniforn1 Mechanical Code, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, for regulati11g the design, construction, quality of Inaterials, erection, installation, alteration, repair, location, relocatiol1, replace1nent, addition to, llse or n1ainte11ance of heating, ventilating, cooling, refrigeration systelTIS, incinerators, or other miscellaneous heat-producing appliances in the City of Meridian. The code provides for issuance of perl11its a11d collection of fees therefor; each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of such Uniform Mechanical Code and the Uniforn1 Mechanical Code Standards have been made a part of Title 7 of the Revised and COlnpiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The Mechanical Inspector shall e11force all code regulations as specified in the aforementioned codes and any City Ordinance as they pertain to Mechanical11latters. For and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. That RIMI Inc. 479 S. Spoonbill Ave., Meridian, Idaho shall be the Mechanical Inspector for the City of Meridian, Idaho; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to RIMI Inc. for services rendered shall be according to the value placed on the Mechanical per1nit, and based llpon the follovving pay schedule: A. 75% of the perlnit fees for the first $30,000 in permit fees collected annllally. B. 60% of the per111it fees between $30,000 to $45,000 in pern1it fees collected annually. AGREEMENT - 1 ( ( c. 50% of the perl11it fees betvveen $45,000 to $60,000 i11 perluit fees collected an11ually. D. 40% of the per1l1it fees betvvee11 $60,000 to $75,000 in perlnit fees collected a11nl.lally. E. 40% of the permit fees over $75,000 i11 perlllit fees collected annually. 3. The per111it fee of a vallIe of $1,000.00 or 1110re shall be negotiable between tl1e City of Meridia11 and the Mecha11ical Inspector. The Mechanical Inspector is an independent contractor and not a11 employee of the City of Meridian and shall be responsible for all insurances, vvorl(er's con1pensation, taxes, and shall furnish certificates for each eluployee to the City of Meridian. The ter1n of this contract shall be one year comrnenci11g on October 1, 1999, until October 1, 2000, and shall continue froIn year to year until ter111inated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terI11inated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of terlnination to the other party. Termination n1ay be made without cause. APPROVED: APPROVED by City Council ROBERT D. CORRIE MAYOR - CITY OF MERID IAN RODNEY L. EDL PRESIDENT - RIMI INC. ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CITY CLERI( - CITY 0 F MERID IAN ey/ A:\Ivlechanical RI MLAgr AGREEMENT - 2 (~ ( CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT l11ade the 1 st day of October, 1999, by and betvveen the City of Meridian, al1 Idaho l11U11icipal corporation, and WHITMAL"J & ASSOCIATES, INC., a licensed Building Inspector, located i11 Boise, Ida11o. The City of Meridia11, a mU11icipal corporation duly organized a11d existi11g u11der the generalll1unicipallavvs of the State of Idaho, desires to retai11 t11e services of a Building Inspector to serve the City of Meridian. The City of Meridian has adopted the Unifor111 Bllilding Code, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, for regulating the erection, construction, conversion, occupancy, equipping, use, height, area and n1ainte11ance of all buildings or structures in the City. The code provides for iSSllance of pern1its a11d collection of fees therefor; and each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditio11S and terms of such U11iforln Building Code and the Unifornl Building Code Sta11dards have been ll1ade a part of Title 7 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridia11. The Building Inspector shall enforce all code regulations as specified in the aforelnentioned codes al1d a11Y City Ordinance as they pertain to building Inatters and shall inclllde all inspections for occupancy. For and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. That Whitman &Associates, Inc. 284 Oakhurst Way, Boise, Idaho shall be the Building Official for the City of Meridian, Idaho; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to Whitman & Associates Inc. shall be according to the value placed on the buildi11g permit and based upon the follovving pay schedllle: A. 50% of the pern1it fees for the first $30,000 in permit fees collected annually. B. 40% of the permit fees between $30,000 to $50,000 in permit fees collected annually. AGREEMENT - 1 ( c. 30% of the per111it fees betvveen $50,000 to $75,000 in per111it fees collected annually. D. 25% of the perll1it fees over $ 75,000 i11 perlnit fees collected an11l1ally. 3. The per1nit fee for any structure of a value of $500,000 or 1110re sl1all be negotiable betvveen the City of Meridia11 and the Building Inspector. 4. 85% of reinspection fees collected. The Building Inspector is an independent contractor a11d 110t an employee of the City of Meridian and shall be responsible for all insurances, worl(er's compensation, t~xes, and shall furnish certificates for each employee to the City of Meridian. The term of this contract shall be one year cOffi111e11cing 011 October 1, 1999, until October 1, 2000, and shall continl.le froln year to year llntil terlninated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of terlnination to the other party. Termination may be made vvithout cause. APPROVED: APPROVED by City Council ROBERT D. CORRIE NIAYOR - CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~\~ ~ \. ~ DAUNT WHITNlAN PRESIDENT - WHITMAN &ASSOC. INC. ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CITY CLERI< - CITY OF MERIDIAN ey/Z:\ W ork\M\lvleridian 15360N1\BldgServWhitman.Agr AGREEMENT - 2 CONTRACT FOR SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT Inade tIle 1 st day of October, 1 999, by and betvveen tI1e City of Nleridian, all Idaho 111ltnicipal corporatio11, a11d L YND, INC., a lice11sed PIUll1bi11g I11spector, located in Meridia11, Idaho. The City of Meridian, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the gelleral municipal laws of the State of Idaho, desires to retain the services of a Plulnbing Inspector to serve tIle City of Meridian. The City of Meridian has adopted the Uniform Plu11lbing Code, published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, for regulating the plU111bi1lg of all building or structures in the City of Meridian. The code provides for issuance of permits and collection of fees therefor; each and all of the regulations, provisions, conditions and terms of Sltc11 Uniforln Plu111bing Code and the Unifor111 Plulnbing Code Standards have been Inade a part of Title 7 of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The Plumbing Inspector shall enforce all code regulations as specified in the aforementioned codes and any City Ordinance as they pertain to Plumbing matters. For and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. That L YND Inc. 3420 Sugar Creek, Meridian, Idaho shall be the Plumbing Inspector for the City of Meridian, Idaho; 2. The fee payable by the City of Meridian, Idaho, to L YND Inc. for services rendered shall be according to the value placed on the Plumbing permit, and based upon the following pay schedule: A. 50% of the pernlit fees for tIle first $100,000 i11 pern1it fees collected annually. B. 40% of the permit fees between $100,000 to $200,000 in permit fees collected annually. c. 30% of the per11lit fees over $200,000 in permit fees collected annually. AGREEMENT - I ( -+ ( ( 3. Upon perlnit reconciliation, if the number of fixtures "vas u11der reported then the Inspector shall receive S09i> of the fees dLle up to a lilnit of five (5) additional fixtures. Any amOLl11t beyond five (5) sl1all be negotiated by the Inspector and the Mayor. The Plumbing Inspector is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City of Meridia11 and shall be responsible for all insura11ces, vvorl(er's c0111pensatio11, t~xes, and shall furnish certificates for each e111ployee to the City of Meridian. The term of this contract shall be one year commencing on October I, 1999, until October 1, 2000, and shall continue from year to year until tem1inated a provided hereinafter. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon the giving of at least thirty (30) days notice of termination to the other party. Termination may be made vvithout cause. APPROVED: APPROVED by City Council '~J ;;?~'. ~ LYND HOOVER PRESIDENT - LYND INC. ROBERT D. CORRIE MAYOR - CITY OF MERIDIAN ATTEST: WILLlAlv1 G. BERG, JR. CITY CLERIC - CITY OF MERIDIAN ey/Z:\ W ork\M\Nleridian 1 5360M\PlumbingL YND.Agr AGREEMENT - 2 ( January 14, 2000 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 18, 2000 APPLICANT: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: ~ REQUEST: GARY SMITH - LATECOMER FEES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED MEMO CITY PLANNING DIRECTO CITY WATER DEPT: Th r pr~pUY0 +htS--e 03 h1^-cltt S ? Ifo l1)~ wz;LN- ~ 10 ~hu-r ? CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTI MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: IDAHO POWER: l? S fA l.rJ (V /~ ([' l p'? pJ pt0. CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. (~ ( r1~.. · Interoffice Memo Date: January 11, 2000 To: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL Cc: file I City Attorney From: GARY D. SMITH, PE RE: LATECOMER FEES Mayor & Council: A provision exists in the Se\Aler and Water Use portions of the existing City of Meridian Ordinance to allow the return of a portion of funds, expended by a developer/entity vvho extends water and or sewer lines to hislher development, vvhen property adjacent to this extension develops and wishes to connect to the extension. This return of expenditure has come to be known as a "Late-comer" fee. Presently, late-comer fees are collected by the City on a lot by lot basis at the time a building permit is issued for a lot in a development that is connecting to a se\Ver or water line installed by others. This method of collecting the late-comer fee results in a slow retum of funds to the developer/entity that extended the se'Ner or water line and it creates a lot of paper 'Mlrk for city staff. Recently, I have had discussions with our accounting staff and with several developers concerning the return of these latecomer fees and, as a result of those discussions, I vvould appreciate your consideration of a change in our present policy for collection of these latecomer fees. Proposal: When a developer, connecting to a sewer or water line installed by others, submits a final plat vvith development plans, the developer pays a late-comer fee for the entire project being developed, with hislher plat application fee or pays the fee at the time the development plans are approved. This Vlill return a larger amount of funds, at one time, to the developer/entity VJho extended the line(s) and it \^Jill reduce the reimbursement paper vvork by city staff. For example; A development containing 40 platted lots, connects to an existing sewer line installed by others (upon vvhich a late-comers agreement exists, VJhich agreement requires payment of a late- comer fee of $100 per lot) pays a late-comer fee of 40 X $100 = $4,000 along with the plat application fee or pays this fee at the time development plans are approved. I VIrOuld appreciate your review of this proposal and receiving any comments you may have. 1~~ - wi':' .t;......_ ( ( Desk of the Fire Chief Memo To: Mayor Robert Conie, Council, City Clerk From: Ken W. 8aIJers CC: file Date: 0112812000 Re: Change Order Here is change order # 3 and # 4for the Rre Station on Franklin Roact Change order # 3: . We are deleting the projection screen; we are looking at a different style. . Delete light fixture for the sign on the front of the Fire Station. · Relocate daMlspout because of sign. . We have decided to not paint the wall inside the bays, but we will need to seal the brick for moisture. . Add shelf in the kitchen and living room area. The total for this change order will be $418.16 Change order # 4: · Adjust the height of seY.e" lid in drivavay. · We either had to build a metal ladder and platform that tx>1ts to the wall YJith all the safety harness or build a catwalk above the ceiling. . There was no undet1ayment for the floors in the bid specs. . Delete the plastic lavm edging in grass. The total for this change order v.;1I be $922.00. 1 ~.~.~{r:'~(:t;,~~HRADNERGE t.~~~~ .:, ->4-).'jJ '\ .. ~. - ,.- - .~ AlA D()CU!vIENT (i70! ( f, ()WNEM ~ 8 ARCHITECT 0 CONTRACTC)R .1;1 FIELD 0 OTHER .0 '(- ~ - '. - PROJECT: r-t:ridian Fire Station (name, address). Franklin Road r-t:ri di an, Idaho TO CONTRACTOR: Beniton Construction Co. (name, address) PO Box 838 . . ~dian, Idaho 836fi) CHANGE ORDER 0lUf\.IBER: Three (3) DATE: IS Decarber 199 ARCHITECT"S PROJECT NO: 9901 CONTRACT DATE: 30 July 1999 CONTRACT FOR: General Construction - The Contract is changed as follows: 1. A 11 changes in Proposal ReqJest #5 - as fa 11 ONS: A. Delete projection screen fran contract - Deduct . B. Delete light fixture Type P4, cap existing conduit. Furnish aM install connecti on to i lllllTi nated \\all si gn . See attached dOCtJrents. - Deduct C. Relocate doI.nspout location - 00 charge - D. "Onit block filler and paint for all interior block finish. Add Hand C23 . Sarri -gloss sealer - Add ,.2. Add she 1 f as per ProJXlsa 1 Request #6 - Add ($215.00) ($ 89.84) $556.00 $167 .00 $418.16 ; r ~ ~,- - ~ ~ - ~ ~ ;~ ~ -I~ ~~ ~... _. _.~ ;~~(~':i ;?~;'- ~'" - ~ . f~~.:.:~~.~~C" HANGE ~I~:';~;~- ~~~.7~.'::'~. ~ORDER ~~ ~~rii - -,';"'-,- '--.,- ~~;~~AjA DOCUMENT G701 fi5~t;:: ' '_' I ' ~\~. ;",f ~:"~ ' .- OWNER ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR FIELD OTHER (E ~ ~ o ~ y;" d ~~~--.~..... + . yt: ;:':. '~"~ :~::::-~:f~<~?:PROJECT: ~dian Fire Station ~<~:_f~:(name, address) Franklin Road ;~~ ~:~. ~' "-__ c r-t:ri di an, Idaho 83680 :~:'--~~:~.':~_~'L_l 0 CONTRACTOR: Beniton Construction Co. Z:,:';::,-?~ti~(name, address) PO Box 838 ~it-~}~, ~dian Idaho 83600 ~f~)~~-; , - ' i~~L, "." . ;';':.\;~~~;-'.~_The Contract IS ch~ged as follows: ~':2~,--!<~~~,-~ 1) Adjust. the hei ght of exi sti ng S€'Ner 1 i d ~lt~f:~r2) Provide and install attic \\e.lkwly, light switch and 00 (2) ~1~t~".- . 'ilarrp . holders. - Proposa 1 Request #7 ~~Vi~~<3} ProvlCle and lns~ll floor un<ter:l~yrren~ ~~-~~i:st~4). Curb change-as directed by r-t:rldlan Flre Oepa.r1m:nt 1.ti:~5} Delete plastic lawn edging , ~~-~-_. ~L. _'_ ~~t~'~.. :-" -,' ~:<~'~:, " CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: Four (4) DATE: 19 January 2COO ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 9901 CONTRACT DATE: 30 July 1999 CONTRACT FOR: General Construction +$ 164.00 +$ 1,158.00 +$ 2,836.00 -$ 1,956.00 11.~:~