HomeMy WebLinkAboutWoodbridge PP Comments
MARCH 17,2000
PP 00-003
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
MARCH 21, 2000
APPLICANT:
WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, LLC
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
I~
:t
REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WOODtRIDGE SUBDIVISION OF 164 LOTS ON 50,' ACRES
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY CLERK:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
GHY WATER DEPT:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COU NTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
Materials presented at public meetlng$' shall become property of the City of Meridian,
""'
MARCH 3, 2000
PP 00-003
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
MARCH 7, 2000
APPLICANT: WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY. LLC
AGENDA ITEM NUMBER:
REQUEST: PRELIMINARY PLAT fOR WOOO&'RIOGE SUBOIVISION OF 164 LOTS ON 50,9 ACRES
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
SEE ATTACHED P&Z MINUTES
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
SEE ATTACHED LETTERS
CITY ATTORNEY:
SEE ATTACHED RECOMMENDATIONS
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
CITY WATER DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
SEE ATTACHED
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
Materlols pr.sented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian,
;,t{jJ p~ ~/?t60" ~
v.......:',
:-:-; ,(,
.. .
,
~/
MAYOR
Robert D. Corrie
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
(208) 888-4433. Fax (208) 887-4813
City Clerk Office Fax (208) 888-4218
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 288-2499. Fax 28&-~501
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211. Fax 887-1297
,-II::
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Ron Anderson
Keith Bird
Tammy deWeerd
Cherte McCandless
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 . Fax 888,A854
Woodbridge Community, LLC
100 N. 9th St., Ste. 300
Boise,ID 83702
February 10, 2000
RE:
To Whom It May Concern:
This Isner is to confrrm that the City of Meridian's Planning & Zoning Cg.!J1!Uission
re~~J!ded approval with conditions on the Preliminary Plat application fqr th..e
s~iJ.~C't 'erpperty at their 2/8/00 meeting, The preliminary plat is ~~neduled fo'r a p'ublic
bf~ij}~~ore the City Council on 3/7/00." . '" ~
~!;f... "..".;. .~, ....~,
,,:$,f,
"~1,- ?
CLIY OF MERIDIAN
~~
Sl1w'i Stiles .
Piailning Director/Zoning Administrator
<.
...
'!/;
"
'I, ,~
HP LaserJet 3100
Printer/Fax/Copier/Scanner
SEND CONFIRMATION REPORT for
City of ,Meridian
2088886854
Feb-11-00 8:59AM
Job Start Time Usage Phone Number or ID Type Pages Mode Status
300 2/11 8:58AM 0'33" 208 323 2399 Send......,..,.... 2/ 2 EC 96 Corn p let e d,;gif!'"~1~*'ff'''o1''~~J''''''--,,ii=''''''w
Total
0'33"
Pages Sent: 2
Pages Printed: 0
~eo::= "" lilt
1..............
~~
CITY or IMERIOIAN
PI;1rHlIll9 I{. ZonlllY
'":.III
J::" ... .
1.. "::; ;,i;;4.::::: rO:':J.~
('CO.. .......,......"........
. :J23.23IlQ
,......... 8alylI DiIY
'... 2/11100
~
.. . .
. .M_ .-'
- '
"'..;'.............................. ....... .:::.:.:........:..,
... 2 ~.....,
l/lII
CIqooIl 1lI"'- C_~ C_....... c_...
~
City of Meridian
Planning & Zoning
II'!
, .
, ,
),:-. . . ~
.,:<.~:::~J. "^-:~._. I~.._..~[
CllleF
To:: Bill
From:
CC;
Will
on
~~
cjF~
is With Fiies
and other
to
pilar to the
Bil.
. Page 1
'II
~
Gilllily,Pri'lllillilonding.
malfl.doc Hi, Will -
AttaGhEli1 is a copy of a ~ that I sent to Bill Nichols (Eliten though it's addressed to Gigray)
requesting clarification on the O'Neil Enterprise (Woodbridge) question" private ys. public
bonding. I'ye also sent OVer a hard copy. If you ha\fe any input on this or know of arwtl1er
<'rdinance to n'er me to for: more clarifica:ioo, p&ease let me knoW.
Thanks!
,.
:"'i:
Merfdian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8. 2000
Page 47
Norton: Mr. Chairman, for the record I abstained from voting at the last vote, I did not
vote, I think there is a real concern here regarding density and I think part of it is my
newness. I did not understand, I thought we were voting on the density of this vote, I
think it is too dense for my liking. I think we have a wonderful neighbor who is allowing
ch,ildren to access. I can understand Commissioner Brown's comments regarding it
permanent but I hesitate to go that way, Just so the Commission understands where I
am coming from. I think it is too dense at this point.
Borup: Thank you. Any other Commissioner's have any comments before'" assume
someone make a motion.
:~
Brown: Mr, Chairman I move approval of Item 6 the request for preliminary plat for the
proposed Wesley Subdivision for 30 townhouse lots and one office lot on 5,029 acres -
by Centers Construction subject to staff recommendations and comments.
,.
Barbeiro: Second the motion. Any discussion. The motion did reflect the previous
motion on converting two lots to the open space park area, I assume everyone noticed
that. Commissioner Brown changed 32 to 30, Okay, we have a motion, all in favor.
MOTION CARRIED: 2 AYES, 1 ABSTAIN, 1 NAY
e
.,!.
Borup: Question for the attorney. Do we need 3 votes or just a majority of those
voting? .
Swartley: Mr. Chairman, a majority, You just approved it.
/-
Borup: Well we don't have a majority of the Commission. That is why I asked. We had
2 aye votes.
END OF SIDE FIVE
Borup: Thank you. That is concluded. The recommendation will go on the City
Council. For anyone here, there is another public hearing at City Council where
essentially the same process will be repeated.
7. P.UBLlC HEARING: REQUEST FO,', mm . .
.' ,.Q.. J .,.. VISION-164 LOTS ON 50.9 ACRES B.
AST SIDE OF SOUTH LOCUST GROVE X MILE
. . RANKLlN ROAD:
.,
Borup: I'd like to open the public hearing on this item and begin with staff comments,
Hawkins Clark: Commissioner's, this project, as you know, has gone through the
process of annexation and zoning and conditional use permiFfor PUD conceptuaL, They
are now coming through for a preliminary plat and on the screen is phase one .'!Yhich is
~/... .:.
the west side of the five mile there which does conform to the conditional use permit,
<l'
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission!>
February 8, 2000
Page 48
planned unit development, conceptual plan, that you and the City Council have
approved. This is the view from Locust Grove and a view of the stub street from where
you enter the property. A written response to the staff comments was submitted this
evening and I would defer to the applicant to go ahead and address those with you at
this time.
Borup: Any questions of Brad from the Commission? Would the applicant like to come
forward,
ffi
O'Neill: Mr. Chairman, members of the Commission my name is Derrick O'NeilL 100
North 9th, Ste. 300. I am president of O'Neill Enterprises, managing member of
Woodbridge Community, LLC, Hopefully we won't be here till 3 o'clock tonight. f want
to clarify a couple things and maybe make this real quick. One we have reviewed the
comments made by staff in the staff report. We understand and identify the areas of
concern by staff. One we agree the reasonably issues and understand our obligation
with them and then we also intend to work with staff to define and clarify these
comments. As asked, we submitted today some clarifications and supplemental
language to their conditions so we could start a dialogue with staff, We also made a
copy to you guys here. With that being said, we feel as we did in the past that we would
request a recommendation for approval to City Council from you subject to a couple of
things. One that the staff and the applicant have the ability to refine, clarify and
supplement the comments in the staff report prior to City Council hearing. We just want
to make sure we have the (inaudible) not to change the words but to sit down with them
and refine, clarify and supplement the comments to the staff report. I think a lot of them
are engineering related. I let my engineer go about 9 o'clock because he had to be
home, but I think these are issues that we can sit down and work through with the staff,
1 guess that is what I would ask you to do now. If you don't want to do that I suppose
we can spend a sufficient amount of time maybe going through each of the issues but I
think we can work through it the way I suggested. I leave that up to you guys.
:>.
;ii:(
Borup: Oka~ Any questions for the Commissioner's.
Hatcher: I have a question for staff. Based upon the applicants comment in working
directly with staff and refining these issues, do you have any problems with this?
Hawkins Clark: Since most of them are engineering related I will defer to Bruce here,
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman and members of the Commission. As Mr. O'Neill pointed out,
a lot of these are engineering related. I guess maybe I would like to just state that we
certainly would be willing to sit down and try to clarify our points if they are not clear
enough. We want to be intent of the comments for example, site specific comment
number 1. You've read my comments many times before about sanitary sewer. The
requirement on the applicant is to install the sewer mains to and through the proposed
development. The designer is to coordinate main sizing and routing with public works.
That certainly is something that we definitely need to do with their design team. The
comment as I drafted it in this memorandum, I did elaborate a little more than I usually
;;;
(,
Meridian PI~nning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 49
do and those comments were based upon some earlier information that we had at the
time of the Five Mile Trunk Line Sewer was built. Our consulting engineer at the time
Roylance and Associates prepared a sewer study at the time showing us where mains
needed to be ran. Certainly I concur with the applicant that we need to go over hard
field data to best determine the routing and size of those lines. I don't have a problem
what so ever with doing,that. I have talked several times with the applicants engineers
regarding irrigation and so forth. I guess in a nut shell, I don't really have a problem
with meeting with them and clarifying these but I do want to just make sure that the
comments as written are our intentions. We intend for these comments to move
forward with some modification maybe as far as clarifications, I certainly don't want to
get into a situation where staff is an negotiation process. I want these to move forward,
maybe with a little refining. But, not to sit down with staff and negotiate points away,
Borup: I am maybe assuming Mr. Hatcher I think is there probably some hesitation on
the Commission to forward something on so open ended. We have not even seen the
applicants comments to the staff comments or any reply so I assume that is kind of
where you were heading.
Hatcher: That was not where I was heading but it was one concern. Where I was
heading was upon having staffs concurrence with Mr. O'Neill being comfortable that you
can resolve staffs comments with your engineers prior to the next or the City Council
hearing this. ~
O'Neill: Based on the information we have I feel we could certainly do it but I am not
sure we have the information here in front of you tonight to be able to make a decision
on whether or not the street corner or the sewer all along Locust Grove needs to be put
there. I think we've got to do a little more engineering work and there maybe an
alternative that is different then that that satisfies the City and City engineers that may
allow us to do something. If you did this as written, it says includes all frontage along
south Locust Grove Road and we are not arguing with the fact that we need to put
sewer through and to the project, we are in agreement with that. We just want to make
sure that we don't have to (inaudible) all the way along south Locust Grove Road if
there is another way to do that or if the topography would not let you do that. We are in
the preliminary plat stage. We have not done the fi.nal design on the sewer. We are
working on that and that is something we certainly intend to do.
Borup: I think what Mr. Hatcher maybe asking another time to do that before the City
Council hearing.
O'Neill: You bet. I think we'd feel very comfortable doing that.
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman that is an excellent example. Certainly it is Public Works
intent that sewer be installed alon~fthe entire frontage of Locust Grove. One of the
discussion items that we have had is whether it be best served to bring sewer through
their development out on to Locust Grove and then run south with it. And, as well as
run north with it to the north boundary of their development. We don't know yet until we
~
.)
'.
r
<:"
"
'"
~ ~
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8, 2000
Page 50
have some better engineering information whether that north leg would be best served
coming back to the line that they would be extending through their development or ~
whether it would be better served running toward Franklin Road, However{ it is our
intent that one way or the other sewer would have to be installed along the entire
frontage. If it is determined that that stretch from their entrance road to their north
boundary is better served going to Franklin, then that stretch would be installed by
O'Neill's as a dry line sewer until such time it could be extended on further north to
Franklin Road. From Public Works perspective we are looking at sewer in all of the
frontage one way or the other,
Borup: Just on that example, if it did extend to Franklin, what property would that
service? The property on the west side of Locust Grove then?
~
Freckleton: The west side of Locust Grove and the property from their north boundary
to Franklin,
Borup: Well right, but O'Neill's would not need that. The only one that it would service
along their frontage would be on the west side of the road then. ·
i..1.;
...
Hatcher: Mr. Chairman, lets not forget that this project does also have another piece of
property on the west side north of what's in front of us today, I see these as design
'"
issues, not preliminary plat issues. ;It
O'Neill: If you read condition number 2 I would be more comfortable, which does the
same thing in my opinion-dealing with the water. It is,!really handling the issue the
exact same way. Water service to the site will be via extensions of existing main on
Locust Grove Road, The applicant will be responsible to construct water mains to and
through the proposed development. Subdivisions designer coordinate main sizing
(inaudible) the Public Works Department. In my mind the sewer issue is essentially the
same thing. We've got to provide the sewer tG. and through and we have to coordinate
that with our final design with the engineer. What I did not want to go through and
specifically nit pick these things. I am prepared to, but I feel we can work through these
with the City Engineer and by the time we hit the City Council, we will have maybe
refined and clarified some of these issues and will be comfortable and the City will be
comfortable with-
Borup: Question then for staff. What is the status if agreement for some reason is not
reached. Does it still go forward to City Councilor come back to us. Do we know?
~!
Freckleton: I guess I would defer that to legal counsel. Lam not too terribly comfortable
with this set up. We can not send recommendations to City Council without an approval
from you guys. Their then going to go and work this out with staff and I am not going to
have anything to recommend to City Council. Nothing is going to them.
O'Neill: I think it is misunderstood what I said. I was-I am saying as long as you
recommend approval of the subject to staff and applicant having the ability to clarify,
.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission "
February 8, 2000
Page 51 ti -
Swartley: Well exactly. I could send something entirely different to City Council then
what your going to come up with in your negotiating with staff, I am sorry. Your just-
Borup: Are we talking any issues here other than engineering. Are there a couple
others that would be separate from -
Freckleton: There was a issue of the open area considering the detention ponds as part
of the open area. There was comment regarding the fencing and landscaping plan.
There was comment regarding assurity requirements by the City for development
improvements. Then the multiple use pathway issue on Five Mile Creek. So those are
the items that they have highlighted other then engineering.
Borup: Any other Commissioner's? Do you have anything else?
O'Neill: I'd be happy to go through the specific conditions if you want. I kind of need
your direction.
Borup: I am thinking in the engineering issues it doesn't make sense for us to get into.
Hatcher: Mr. Chairman, do you concur with staff comments and recommendations as
they are written?
O'Neill: We don't. Unless we have the ability to sit down and make sure we understand
them. We got this report last Thursday. We've requested, and not been able to get
together with staff, so we understand the specific intent of them. That is the first thing
We want to do is make sure that we understand where they are coming from and what
their issues are. Second we can make a decision on whether we agree with them or
not.
Hatcher: Well for discussion purposes (inaudible). If the applicant needs more time to
work out these engineering issues with City staff, then we can continue it to our next
meeting until they come to a resolution. I think that would be the best interest for
everyone involved.
O'Neill: We would prefer not that if that means that-
Hatcher: That would mean a open book recommendation through until there are
resolutions.
Brown: Code requires that the recommendation comes from the Planning and Zoning
Commission. If you have not been able to work with staff and come up with
conclusions, then this should not be the (inaudible) peflod. You need to work that out
with staff.
...
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8, 2000
Page 52
O'Neill: Then I am prepared to go through our specific comments and tell you what they
are,
Brown: And, as we discussed, those comments are engineering items and we need
comments from staff to know that that is. If staff feels confident to handle that now, as
you discuss each one of those items, then I guess that would be appropriate, If no, we
are wasting a lot of peoples time. We don't even have them in front of us. You have
not choose to share that with us yet-what your comments are.
O'Neill: We got the report Thursday. We've tried to sit down with staff but staff has not
been able to do that. I'll share with you right now if you want comments and walk
through with them specifically. ='
Borup: Let me ask Bruce and-
>toO.:'
O'Neill: Shari isn't even here so I don't know how staff can address the issue.
"
Brown: Her staff is here though.
Borup: How soon do you think a meeting could be set up and how many do you think it
would take.
Freckleton: Since the time we drafted our comments I have had numerous phone calls
with their design team. Staff is pretty reluctant to sit down at a table after we prepare
comments and send them to Planning and Zoning or City Council for that matter
outlining,.our position on these issues. We are pretty reluctant to sit down and basically
negotiate.things away. We are not or can not do that. Once our comments are
submitted, they're submitted. I believe this is the proper form for those discussion
items. I certainly can address the engineering right now if that's your desire, I don't
know if Brad is prepared to tackle the other items or-
Borup: Do you have enough information as far as the grade, topography and design.
Freckleton: I don't but I believe that that first comment can be handled pretty simply.
Those are design issues that we would have to work out between now and the time that
we approve the final plan for the development, which is a normal standard-- I don't-I
feel comfortable with -if you want to refine that comment to say something like routing
and sizing to be determined between the applicants engineer and public works.
Hatcher: Mr. O'Neill, question for you. Short of going through each and every one of
these specific topics and talking about each issue, in general can you enlighten me as
to why you have a problem with each one of these. This is not a form for negotiation.
We are not lawyers sitting here negotiating a deal. The City's got requirements that it
has to uphold, so I want to know in general where you are coming from and why you
don't concur with these comments.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 53
O'Neill: I think I can do that.
..
x
Borup: Real quickly go those that's okay. Just say we're fine.
~,
~i=I
O'Neill: Condition number 1, sanitary service. At this point we'd request to work with
Public Works Dept. so that we can get farther with the final design to determine whether
or not their exact conditions are appropriate. We think as we get into final design and
further design there may be some alternatives that achieve exactly what staff or what
the engineer wants and will satisfy the same purpose. Condition number 2 is okay.
Condition number 3, we want to modify and include the fact that we don't want to pipe
or tile the wetlands on the property. There is a small wetlands area on the property that
could be construed as a drainage and we don't want to tile or pipe that. Condition
number 4, we would like to be able to and you've got the thing that has been handed
out to you so you can followcthis, we would like the ability to work with staff and give
them input and ~esign and location of the street lights. We understand that there is
specific codes and we've got to follow those, but we'd like to have input in the design
and location of them. It is something that we have done many, many times in the past
and would like to do. Condition number 5, detention ponds. The detention ponds will
be built to handle the necessary drainage for the highway district as well as the City
Engineer, There was some question by staff as to whether those would satisfy the
common~rea requirement that we've got in the project. We identified common area
that would be twice the required common area in the project. We still intend for these
detention (inaudible) common areas to service some active and some as passive open
space. There was a questions there by staff and I think we're saying we will satisfy the
engineering requirement and we will have some open space that is passive which
means kids don't play in it but it is open and you can look at it. We took staff out to a
project alild showed them a while a go the way we would design and do these and we
still very g1uch intend to do that. Condition number 6. We disagree with and feel that
what we agreed to in the conditional use permit was a fencing and landscape plan along
Locust Grove Road. That is what we would like to continue to do. We also agreed that
we wold bond for that. We don't feel detailed landscape plans for all of the common
areas within the community are necessary for review and approval prior to submittal of
the final plat. What we agreed to in the conditional use permit was a landscape plan
along LocusrGrove Road to be reviewed for prior to. I think you can recall that. Same
I
thing with perimeter fencing. Condition number 7, a letter of credit or cash be required
for all pathways, swimming pool, community center, sanitary sewer, water prior to
signature on final plat. Our comment on that on the research we've been able to do in
the last little bit and in past projects is that bonding is not required for primary
improvements and code requires that public improvements be bonded for not private
improvements. This is a private improvement. We feel with the development
agreement and the conditional use permit the City does have authority and the
requirements to get us to put those improvements in, but to bond for them, we don't feel
is appropriate. Condition number 9, sewer and water assessments I gues~ we just w~nt
more clarification on that. It talks about in addition to these water and sewer, .,
latecomers fees will be charged against this parcel. We have asked now for ove~ a year
and a half what those latecomers fees would be and what the formula would be to
,?i
~ y
..~ ~I
~
:i:
;.:
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 54
determine those. The formula has changed and we have not been able to come up a
(inaudible) number, We don't want to agree to a latecomer fee until we understand
what in the world it is going to be and wl-1at the formula is, Again, something I think can
be handled but we have not been able to come to closure on that issue. We also want
to make sure that there is latecomer fees that we can generate if we are pulling services
to our site that other people are going to benefit from as well. Condition number 10,
There is a question about the homeowners association or Nampa Meridian Irrigation
District owning the irrigation facility, We fully intent for this to be Nampa Meridian
Irrigation system. It talks about year around service to the property. I guess I am still -
we have talked to the Engineer a little bit but I am not still real clear to this. Our limited
investigation shows us that this condition, if we can't have year around water, we need
to hook up to City water for 3 months out of the year Oct thru Jan, and there would be
an assessment or hookup fee for that in access of $90,000. We are not sure we
understand that to begin with and/or agree with it. Condition 14, it's a tough one. We
sympathize with the City and I guess what we can say is that it may be ludicrous for the
City to maintain and accept liability under such a scenario. We are willing to offer the
Nampa Meridian folks as a homeowners association the liability insurance necessary for
them to be comfortable with it, but we would like the City to help us work with the
irrigation district so we can work through that. As you remember, part of the
Comprehensive Plan asks for projects to have pathways along Five Mile Creek. Under
this scenario the City doesn't own or wouldn't own this immediately. We would be the
ones putting it in and owning it and the irrigation district has a problem with that. What
we are asking that the City works with us on that but I guess I don't really have an
answer for their concern on 14, other than I agree with them. It would be silly for them
to take responsibility of something that they don't own. I guess lhat we would ask that
we enter into the agreement with Nampa Meridian. We would provide liability insurance
t~ Nampa Meridian until such time it could be assigned to the City of Meridian. I guess I
did that very quickly, but you asked for an overview and then I handed you specific
comments and some narrative to those comments on each of the conditions.
Borup: Any questions.
Hatcher: I guess more of a statement. Going through this -following along in you letter
as your speaking, a lot of your concerns is that the I's aren't dotted and the T's aren't
crossed and you don't know what the specifics are. If you were referring to will it be
remembered when, if you remember during the conditional use permit and our submittal
to the PUD and stuff, I am kinda put the shoe on the other foot. When you came in 2 or
3 months in a row on this project asking us to listen to your general request and while
we don't want to get specific because we are in the design process. This is a overall
design intent and while we can't give you a specific answer because we don't have
one-well n9,w the City's turned around and said hey, we have specific answers for you,
These are our conditions. I can appreciate your position and I know that PUD's are very
harmonious space, but I think it is time that we start dotting I's and crossing T's, and it is
time for OEI to start dotting I's and crossing T's and if that means that you have to sit
down with your engineer and start working these details out to conform with City
~
~
~ t:
.,-;
~
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 55
requirements, then that is the time -I feel that is where we are at now so we can come
to agreement because we can't keep going forward with generalities from this point on,
O'Neill: I agree with that 100 percent. My response to that is if we can't sit down with
the City Engineer to review some of these, we've got to put them in front of you,
Specifically, Condition number 3. The way we read that is that Condition number 3
would say that any drainage ditch or easement needs to be tiled. We have a drainage
ditch that is considered a wetlands and we don't feel that it is appropriate and/or
necessary to tile it. So would ask that that be changed. Another one is we are saying is
don't feel that we need to bond for private improvements because we can't find
anywhere in your code or your laws that says we are require'd to bond fo~rivate
improvements. Therefore, we are agreeing that if it is public improvements we would
bond for it and in the conditional use permit we did agree to give you a specific detail
and plan and we would bond for the Locust Grove Road, which we said was a very
specific area. We agreed to do that and ar.e fully prepared to do that. Commissioner
Hatcher, I agree with you. What we are trying to do is get some way to work with these
guys to say, you know we either come to an agreement or don't or we got to come in
front of you guys and City Council and say what I just did. I guess the letter that we
presented to you is our way of crossing the T's and dotting the I's, We feel that there is
somewhere between what the staff has submitted and what this is should be the
ultimate reality, but that is what-we had a 48 hour period of time to turn this around to
you, We would have much rather have gotten it to you yesterday, but we did not have
time to do that. I agree with you.
10
.
Hatcher: I can empathize with you. Staff recommendations are dated February 2nd and
your response letters dated today. At the same time I don't think the Commission in
front of you tonight and I speak for myself, but I do~t think liKe you told the first time we
met, we are not going to make any snap decisions. --If we want to sit here until 3 o'clock
in the morning agairfworking these all out, we can do that. Where did we get last time?
We ended up postponing it anyway. Not of us could think straight at 3am.
Freckleton: If you would like I could fly through probably just a wee bit quicker than he
went through and touch on each of those items and maybe clarify some of these points
for you.
'.'
Hatcher: If we could get to come resolution by all means, I would welcome it. But, if we
are going to sit here and spin our wheels to night-
Borup: One thing I might mention, we do have a meeting scheduled for the 22nd of this
month that is all ready on the 150oks.
O'Neill: Can I ask a question? If it were moved to the 22nd , would that still leave us the
ability with that hearing and approval or recommendation to be in front of the Council on
the ih. ·
~
,~
'"
'1
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 56 II
Borup: Do they need 15 days? It looks like we are a day short for notification, There is
just not enough time for legal notification. Commissioner's, do we want to have Bruce -
.,;
Hatcher: I think you can appreciate where we are coming from. We have been down
this road before. I think for your benefit and the City's benefit we deal with this properly.
O'Neill: I guess I need some indication that maybe we should go through some of these
and get your guys thoughts on them. What I am hearing staff say is they have written
these things and this is where they are and they are not going to move from them. If
that is the case, I guess we-it i~ not going to be between us and staff. 'lit is going to be
between us and you folks. I don't think thaJ is really what the staff's intent is but -
..
Hatcher: I don't think staff's intent is that either, but there are minimum requirements
and I think staff has been relatively specific and clear on what those minimum
requirements are, How those requirements are met is a design issue anq that goes to
your engineer. It doesn't go to this board and it doesn't go to staff. It is your engineer
that needs to provide those answers.
Borup: Well, I don't know if all of that is clear cut on every item here.
O'Neill: I think there are some specific code issues and that is what we are asking for
clarification on. Take number 7, we don't see anywhere in the code where it says
bonding for private improvements are necessary. We are asking for-
Borup: You want to get Bruce and Brad-do you want to go down through those? Take
I.
the applicants response you feel is just-can you do that quickly?
Freckleton: I would do that, yes. Item number 1 we have talked about. I don't think we
bave any -we are in agreement on that. Item number 3-our comment comes straight
from Ordinance. Ordinance requires that all ditches be tiled. If there are certain ditches
that the applicant can not tile for one reason or another, I believe the proper proced}}re
would be to get a variance to the tiling requirement. That is not something that staff can
just set aside. ·
l\
Borup: That is per ordinance. I am going to interrupt here as we go along. Maybe
clarify things as we go. Your comment on-the only concern on that was the wetland
area. .
O'Neill: Yes. It is a delineated Army Corp of Engineers Wetland.
Borup: It looks like from your plat you don't need to be realigning the wetlands anyway,
I>
O'Neill: A portion of it. We are medigating a portion of them.
Borup: So your looking to make that somewhat of a amenity-Subdivision design and
water amenity.
Lt"",-"
:l(
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 57
O'Neill: Yes. As you can see at the upper part of there, that is the area we are
medigating and we will be moving in the area-
Borup: You just going to move it over?
O'Neill: We will move it over and then medigate up above. That area right above up
there is the area of question that I am seeing that is a delineated wetland and we feel it
would be appropriate to leave it open as opposed to tile it and ditch it. I think there are
words in there that said there were circumstances that would allow us to do that, I think
you guys could look-that's what we'd like to do.
(t
Borup: Does the City even have anything that addresses wetlands?
Freckleton: Not that I am aware of.
Brown: That's not one that we can wave. If it is an ordinance it's one that Council has
to do.
Freckleton: That's correct.
O'Neill: We don't have a problem taking that up with Council.
Borup: That item would be a variance then. Item number 4.
Freckleton: Item number 4, Public Works Dept. designates the locations for street
lights. The City of Meridian has adopted a standard type of light. If the applicant wants
to do more than our minimum standard, they can certainly do that. If they want to go to
a historical type light, they can certainly do that. As long as they meet the minimum
criteria that we set down, they can do it. If they want to go with historical pole and light,
the City requires that they enter into a street light agreement which basically states that
the homeowners association will own and maintain the lights. The City of Meridian will
pay power on them but we won't take over ownership or maintenance of them. The
concern there is because they are non-standard, non-stock items. If a globe gets broke
you Qon't just go down to you local electrical supply house and pick a new one up. And
it can be fairly costly as well.
Borup: And your concern on that item was?
O'Neill: My concern was we don't have a problem at all meeting the minimum
requirements, but what we'd like to be able to do is if we exceed..or do something that
satisfies the minimum requirement be able to do it. For example, if their minimum
requirement is 3-25 high street lights and we want to put in 6-20 foot street lights to give
you more light and coverage, we want the ability to talk to them about doing that.
Borup: That kind of thing-
."
.
'"
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 58
O'Neill: That is the kind of thing we want to do, We want input in the design and
location of street lights.
Borup: Sounds like that one is okay.
Freckleton: That's fine.
O'Neill: Its not if we don't get the design and input part of it included in there.
Hatcher: That is normal design. These staff comments aren't going to hold you to the
law like your implying that they will.
Freckleton: I'll skip over 5. That's kind of a P&Z issue. I will go down to assessment
fees, Item number 9. The latecomers fees as Mr, O'Neill mentioned, we haven't
determined a fee yet. We do have a consultant working for us right now that has been
cleaning up some of these old ones to determine these fees..
Borup: This sewer is coming from Magic View area?
Freckleton: It runs right up along side Five Mile Creek-toward St. Luke's, The
latecomers fee is basically going to be the mechanism that the City is going to have in
place to reimburse itself from hook ups.
Borup: That hasn't been figured out?
Freckleton: We haven't had that much development pressure out in this area-not as
much as much as we have in other areas, but we do have a consultant working on it.
We will be getting that very shortly. Certainly if this applicant does install sewer and
water out in Locust Grove as we've put in our comments, they would be eligible to or
they will be able to make applications to City Council for latecomers reimbursement
agreement for that line. That is Council's decision whether to enter into an agreement
or not.
Borup: Is there any indication that the latecomers fees here would be anymore than
other areas.
Freckleton: No. Probably be fairly standard. Just a ball park idea, I'm guessing it
would be somewhere around 500, 600. It depends upon the size of the service area of
course. This is a fairly large service area for this trunk line so it is distributed out over a
larger area.
O'Neill: I guess we just feel a little uncomfortable with that being open ended so that is
why we suggested-(Inaudible cross over discussion). !(
~
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8, 2000
Page 59
Borup: Do you feel comfortable saying there is not going to be any higher then any
other area in Meridian has been assessed. ~
Freckleton: I don't know that we can pin ourselves down with that Keith.
Borup: I'd feel the on that one. How do you agree to-that's agreeing to a blank check.
I guess you've got to trust the City is going to be reasonable.
O'Neill: I guess that is what we are saying. We'd like something in there that gives us
ability to work with the engineer that makes sure it is consistent with and reasonable,
Freckleton: If they want to look at the methodology for the calculation-
Hatcher: Can we have a specific number to OEI by the City Council meeting from that
consultant?
Freckleton: Possibly. I've got him working on another fairly sizable one right now and I
am not sure when they are going to have that one delivered. I'll shoot for it.
...
Barbeiro: Derrick definitely needs a number because he needs to be able to plan what
he is going to charge as fees (inaudible).
~~
Freckleton: Item number 10. I guess the biggest thing there was they had some
questions regarding the methodology or the why we require a single point connection.
Just simply stated it's to cover the period of time in the spring of the year and the period
of time in the fall of the year when you don't have irrigation/water live in ditches. Now,
after talking to (Inaudible) Engineers, I believe that tl1..ey are looking to Five Mile Creek
for their source. If that is the case, that is a year around flow in Five Mle Creek and this
is probably a mute point. It is and has been and will be a requirement of the City of
Meridian to have year around source of water to a pressurized irrigation system. It
depends on the design of the system at this point.
Borup: 'Was it your intention to design that from Five Mile Creek then.
:c.,..
A
O'Neill: That definitely is our intention, but if we are not able to deliver and we are not
sure yet we're not able to deliver year around water the way we interpret this it is in
order to have the pleasure for the City they have water for 3 months out of the year Oct
thru Jan, we are going to asked to pay a $90,000 plus hook up fee to the system. At
least that is the way we understand it. It is the difference in paying for the water to use
the water and paying just to have the privilege to use the water. This is for common
areas not for individual home sites. There is a big, big dollar issue there that we just
don't -
Borup: Has there been apy other options Bruce.
M
~j
<;
.
.
(! "'Jt'ff ..:""
I~ .
iJ ~
o~
rl:i:=1
".J
\'J.;~
"
!'!
"C
;,:! ~
,.. ~!
;;,;
l'l'J _
Meridian Planning. and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 60
Freckleton: There certainly is. They could look into the option of drilling their own well.
Some sort of shallow ground water well. (\
Borup: Is there a concern at this point where the Five..Mile Creek would have the
capacity, is that what your-
O'Neill: Don't know the answer to that.
Frecklet~n~ It certainly would be our -it's in the best interest of the City if they do find an
alternate source for their year around, Water is very costly to pump and especially to
put on the ground. If they can find an alternate source, it i~ definitely in everyone's best
interest I believe. !;
O'Neill: We consider we have an alternate source. It just may not be able to be
provided Oct thru Jan or Feb. Certainly it is provided Mar thru Oct. Wlat they are
saying, if we can't provide the water from Nov thru Feb, we've got to be able to hook up
to City system so we can turn our sprinklers on.
Borup: That is not the City's intent is it. Your not worried about water in the winter time.
Your worried about water in the early and late growing s~ason.
Freckleton: Exactly. In the event we have a drought year and Nampa Meridian shuts
the water off in September and people's yards are dying, they are going to be
screaming. That is the purpose of having the second connection. Ttfe assessment fee
that he is referring to is the potential impact on the City system to be watering the
common areas off of the City system. It is based on the square footage of the
landscape.
O'Neill: We would need clarification on what the specific assessment would be. If we
know the square footage of it, is it just to water the common area or is it to get a hook
up fee and then we pay in addition to that to water the common area. We-
;'
Freckleton: The assessment fee is your hook up fee. Then you will have a monthly
billing. The assessment fee is one equivalent residential unit, in other words what one
house would pay for every 5450 square feet of landscaping.
O'Neill: That's what we though we heard you say and we disagree with the
methodology of that.
END OF SIDE FIVE
O'Neill: It's double dipping. It is one for your individual home site and one for the
common areas,
.".,
'"
~
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 61
Freckleton: No. Your only paying for your common area. Your only paying
assessment fees for your common area, The other has all ready been paid for with
each individual building permit.
O'Neill: Which means its being paid for twice.
Freckleton: No, it is not. It is being paid for once.
O'Neill: (Inaudible) paid for by us as the developer but it's paid for by builder,
Freckleton: They are paying for their.building lot. They are not paying for your common
area.
Borup: I think there is some confusion there. He is saying your assessment fee would
be just for your common area, not the individual lots, How you assess that is 5400-
you say 5400,
O'Neill: And if we have 16 acres of common space then you multiply that out. That
comes to about $90,000 for the assessment to hook up to the system for potentially a 2
month pe~iod of time when their might be a dry season. What we are saying is that we ','
just don't agree with that.
Borup: But you've got to get your source from somewhere. I think what th~ City is
saying you have there, you get Five Mile Creek or drill your own well.
Hatcher: Bruce, this reGluirement-this 12 month access to water for the common area,
whether it comes from the City or other sources, is not the condition.
(Inaudible conversation talking over one another)
~
Hatcher: Unless we sit here and change the wording. I concur with him on that.
.
Freckleton: In essence it is year around. It is water that is available year around.
Howeve{, your not going to be using it outside of the growing season. I don't know
what words to apply to that. That is the intent-is to pick you up from spring of the year
prior to April 15 when water comes in the ditches and from October 15 to the end of the
growing season, whatever that might be,
Hatcher: That source would come from Five Mile Creek or a well or the City. The
assessment fee is only incurred if they connect to the City.
Freckleton: That's correct.
Brown: The assessment fee is-how is that determined. I mean -you q\Joted figures.
Where do you get that. It's in the code? '"'
~
",
~
\'
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8, 2000
Page 62
Freckleton: That's in the Ordinance.
.
O'Neill: We need some help or clarification what section and verse that is in the
Ordinance so we can make sure we are comfortable with that.
Freckleton: I don't have a full Ordinance book,
Borup: I don't know if we are going to get an answer to that one. I think you need
maybe to do some research on water capacity out of Five Mile.
~
O'Neill: We are doing that as we speak. We were surprised by this one, We weren't
aware-
Borup: Yeah, that may answer the whole thing. That has been on every Subdivision-
the off season source of water, At least the last few years. I think it became effect
because the problem, isn't that correct.
Freckleton: The reason they did-the problems we do have when we don't have this
requirement is people will connect their sprinkler systems to City water and irrigation
water and many times, without the property back flow devices, which-
· O'Neill: I don't think we have a problem with the intent of this. We just have a problem
with understanding the formulation. How do you come up w!th the dollars and taking to
the extreme, it is a large dollar number to us and we'd like to' understand where in the
section and code (Inaudible) the common areas and the fee that-
Borup: Looks like some other options. Not the only choice.
Freckleton: Some of that we can (inaudible) from ordinance and some of it is policy. "
Borup: Do you have a comment on 14 Bruce?
Freckleton: I don't. I would defer that to Brad..
Borup: Brad, start with number 5 then.
Hawkins Clark: Right. Number 5 de'hls with the open space areas and I would refer to
the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law that were approved by the City Council. It
is paragraph 2.1.5 on page 10 and I assume that you don't have that so I'll just--. It
doesn't speak-the findings state that the development should include a minimul1i of 14
acres of open space generally consistent with the master site plan and I believe this is
generally consistent with the master site plan. They have referenced the 20 percent,
the findings state 14 acres, I don't have that for you what that is. Maybe Scott can. ~e
term open space shall include with out limitation an active recreation area and
community center, pocket parks, linear parks, green belt corridors alorg Five Mile
Creek. Only site wetlands and corridors between neighborhoods. That must be a
"
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission ,(
February 8,2000
Page 63
mistake there. .In terms of the applicants response that the purpose is to include active
and passive uses. It is the intention of the developer to use these spaces for storm .
water detention I think. It might help first of all to get it pointed out exactly which areas
we are talking about. I think if its usable as it states in the findings and fact there were
approved by the City, as in many other projects there are design issues when it comes
to designing these retention areas. The two percent slope and get it so that there is not
going to be standing water. All those issues thq~come into play,
Borup: So, the concern is retention pond and whether they are usable, Is that your
understanding from the findings that all the open space was supposed to be active,
usable space.
=
Hawkins Clark: That is the wording. An active recreation area and community center,
That is the wording it uses.
O'Neill: The active recreation center was designed where we are going to have the
clubhouse, the swimming pool and an active area for someone to be able to play
soccer or throw the softball around, etc. The areas in-between the neighborhood have
in the past in all of our projects, and we intend to here, redefine as activ~ open space,
Where, if you want to go walk your dog you could do that but your probably not going to
have a sanctioned soccer game or softball game there because there is going to be
trees and drain rock in the bottom of the retention basin so its going to be used more
passively then actively. It still serves as open space and the buffer between
neighborhoods. It would meet the drainage requirements where the water has to drain
through and for the highway district as well as for the City Engineer. We drove staff, not
Brad but Miss Stiles, through several of our projects and she said this is very nice. This
is something we'd like to see.
Borup: That was my understanding from the first time that they were going to be in
there. I guess a definition of what is active usage..
Hawkins Clark: I think so. I guess I don't see an issue with it. The condition dealt
specifically with the detention ponds being designed in such a way that you don't have
that accumulated water. I don't hear that they are not going to do that so-I don't see
that there is an issue here. They stated they are going to maintain it for the governing
agencies and that includes us. Number 6 is the fencing plan in detail -Iandscap~ plan.
,.
I guess I would again refer to the Findings of Fact and~,Conclusions of Law, 2.1.26 is on
page 17. It does say that each plat shall address fencing details for the portion of the
development covered by that plat. Fencing is not the issue here. It is the
comprehensive landscape plan. I can not find and I agree with you, I can not find
anywhere in the conditions that is states that we-that they are going to have to submit
a detailed for anything but the Locust Grove buffer.
Borup: Isn't that also what you were saying Larry.
O'Neill: I am okay with that as long as-
""
....:
:;
~
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8, 2000
Page 64
Borup: That makes sense to me. I don't think (inpudible over-lapped talking)
O'Neill: It is a private improvement.
Hawkins Clark: The wording in the condition - it is very standard that we require
detailed fencing and landscaping plans at the time the final plats are submitted. Interior
to the site on the public right of way, it does not matter. We ask for those to review
those just for-typically there is not much reaction to them. They are just used mainly
to get species so we have something to sign off on when it comes to signing the final
plat.
O'Neill: I don't have a problem with they signing off on a landscape plan, but we've got
5 or 6 different landscaped areas. We prefer to show you a typical. VVhat we don't want
to do is have to bond for that-have the City have to come out and say you put your
tree in four foot deep instead of two foot deep so we are not going to release your letter
of credit or bond. We agree with the fencing for the phase that its in, we will do that, but
a detailed landscape plan for that entire area is something that we've never done
before. We don't interpret the code to mean we have to do that. Don't have a problem
sharing a plan with you. We do it in Boise. We've shared a typical plan. They look at it
and say that works.
r
:1':
Hawkins Clark: Would that typical plan be available~at the time of final plat?
O'Neill: Between tt'J:e difference of final plat submission and approval I think is a
different thing. We prefer to do that at the final plat approval. When you have to sign it,
versus final plat submission.
.l W,
Borup: Your talking about just interior. Your saying you could provide Locust Grove.
don't know how..the other Commissioner's-I think that answers that for me through.
:.:
Can that wording be changed to reflect that.
Hawkins Clark: I guess I would just defer that to legal. To be honest with you I don't
want to speak to the-
Swartley: ~'I can't speak to that either.
Hawkins Clark: Maybe Will can speak as far as the public private.
Borup: The only reason I can see is a lot of these amenities were added for the
conditional use permit and PUD. Since it is conditional use you revoke it.
"
,(
O'Neill: It is real clear that the conditional use and then there is a development
agreement that we have executed with the City that says we will put in these
improvements and the City can revoke our conditional use permit or our development
agreement if we don't. So, we are feeling that you are adequately covered there and
~
:.
II
!t_~
.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 65
it's-for us to go out and file a letter of credit or surety to have you come out and check
whether or not we put the pool in the way we-
i'!
Borup: That makes sense to me.
Swartley: Mr. Chairman, one question. Was this in the new code or the old. The new
one, the 9606B. You don't know. Okay. I was just curious.
Borup: Then the last one-number 14. Have you answered that.
.
Hawkins Clark: I don't believe so. The-they are committing to provide the liability
insurance through the homeowners association, The idea is for the City to not commit
itself on ground it does not own' and I just see it as a rewording of what we have all
ready stated. Am I missing something?
,.
O'Neill: Yeah I think it is an issue that we are going to need to work with and we'd like
the City's support in working with the irrigation district on that. Ultimately, it might be
something that could be assigned to the City if the City were to take it over, so we think
that Nampa Meridian has said that we don't want to enter into an agreements with
private owners. We'd rather enter into agreements with the City because they have the
insurance and whatnot. We are going to try to tell the City or the Nampa Meridian that
we will provide them the insurance and appropriate things and it could be assigned to
the City. We are going to have a lot better leg to stand on going in and negotiating with ·
Nampa Meridian if we've got the City at least to come in and say we support the
concept but sure as #### don't what the liability until it is ours.
i!.
Borup: I hope City going to work real hard on (inaudible), That's what we have been
trying to do for day one.
O'Neill: I guess that is what we're saying. Boy, everyone wants to do this and now all
of a sudden we are being told that we got to go get it done on our own. We understand
from the liability stand point completely what tf1ey are saying, but we think there is
another way to work through it.
Borup: Your just asking for the City to work with you on-
Hawkins Clark: That's a condition. That is the exact working that the applicant and the
City shall work with the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District in securing a license
agreement. It's stated right there.
Borup: What I am not sure, I think everything's agreeable except for 9 and 10.
Hatcher: I think number 9 if we can agree that a dollar amount be available to OEI by
the City Council meeting would be adequate.
Borup: Bruce said he could not commit to that.
\!o"\
,.
l' "
,>
il~ ;.,;
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 66
Freckleton: I could shoot for having that number to you. I did not want to get pinned
down to not to exceed.
~
Borup: You can get that number by City Council.
Freckleton: I'll shoot for it. I will try.
EI
Borup: Then, number 9 was on -Oh, number 10 was the pressurized irrigation and the
alternative water. There needs to be more studies done too,
Hatcher: Mr. O'Neill would you on Item number 10 with the irrigation, do you concur or
plan to provide year around irrigation water.
O'Neill: (Inaudible) would be fully to do that but I can't guarantee that. If I can't
guarantee that I am willing to live with an interpretation, or at least a fair interpretation of
what the City Code and Ordinance says. I would like at least (inaudible) to sit down and
discuss a fair interpretation of what that says.
Borup: Then your saying if you can't guarantee it your-all the residents will be without
water,
O'Neill: I am saying if we can't guarantee it because Nampa Meridian says Five l\i1ile
Creek you can't draw it out of, they may say you can but they say you can't draw out of
it. We can't provide a shallow well, then we would have to commit to a single point
conversion. I am saying that is a reasonable commitment, but we want to make sure
we have a clear understanding of the assessment, how it is calculated and where it
comes from and how we get to that -
"
II
Borup: I think he stated what it is and how it is calculated. I guess the only question is,
is that an ordinance or policy.
O'Neill: And, I guess I'd like to sit down and have our folks interpret the ordinance as
well. I think there might be a different way to interpret it. If there isn't, there isn't.
I
Borup: 5400 seems a little small to me for open space irrigation. (Inaudible) residential"
lot is I am assuming and landscaped area, is that how-
Freckleton: Exactly.
Borup: I think a resident is going to use more water to let or to maintain the same
square footage of area as opposed to an open area.
Hatcher: No necessarily. I would not agree with. It probably uses more.
~.y..
.
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 67
O'Neill: We just want an understanding and it is curious to me that we do have in
another project in another area, we do have a single source that connects to it. We did
pay a hook-up fee for twice as much open space as this and it was not even close to
$90,000 and we do if we need to use it because of the down season. We do have the
ability to -
Borup: So let say he calculates different then.
O'Neill: Right, and I just want to make sure we have the ability to really understand that,
more then what has been said, but what's actually-
Borup: Have we spent enough time Commissioner's? I think agreements haveoeen
reached all but those two items and those are more information needs to be obtained,
We've still got some more to handle on this. Did you have anything to wrap up.
O'Neill: I think, I'm not sure what we got, but I make concurrence with what we-
Borup: I think in my mind everything agreed on, maybe some re-wording other than
(inaudible) intent. This is a public hearing, Our time is running short. We are probably
going to keep the three minute rule in effect so if there is anyone here who would like t
come forward.
McMillan: My name is Reese 'McMillan. East 70 South Locust Grove. I would like to
know on this -is this a revised or a spar than the original deal on there. They talked
about an exit road to the east, where primaries coming out on Locust Grove Road.
Borup: The exit road to the east isn't even handled in this phase. It is just a first phase.
McMillan: What I am getting at though. I'd like to see a road go througli there and keep
some of the traffic off of Locust Grove because Jabil Mfg. is in op~ration. Semi trucks
coming up and down our road continually and we are going to have a problem out there.
~~
Borup: Did City Council revise our recommendation? That road will still go through to
the east. I:
~
McMIllan: Like I say, I'd like to see it go through on this phase of construction here and
that way you'd get two ways in and out of there without everything coming out on Locust
Grove. Also, I agree with or I disagree with the staff over here on the wetlands to tile it
in because that has been wetlands for years down there cause the geese have hatched
out of there and fly over my place all the time. That (inaudible) should be tiled in. I'd
like to see it stay over down there. I agree with them on that. Five mile drain pumping
out of that, I doubt if they will have enough water this time of year to even pump out of it
because it runs real low. In the summer time when drain ditches and everything are
running into it, irrigation water is in there, there is a lot of water in it. This time of year
there is very little water in it.
."
~':il:I
r..~ !:il,.
1M'
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 68
Borup: How does it though like through the end of October?
McMillan: There is still little water coming in the tail end of irrigation, As the year
progresses the water gets lower all the time. They have an existing well on that
property out there and I don't know if they are going to pump out of there or not, but if
they get too much water out of there, it effects my well. I am just the second house from
that project. We have problems on that deal too as far as infringing on my well out
there, because I've got water rights on that well since 1969 so I'd be a little bit perturbed :0
if they start draining my water. Other then that, like I say, it's going to come anyway on
the Subdivision so there is a few things I'd like to see. I know you have problems
(inaudible) in your area over there"next to Eagle Road don't you Mr. Brown.
Brown: Actually, I think it would be better, personally.
McMillan: Like I say, it coming over there in your neighborhood, why don't we propose
your direction and I'd like to see something come out that other side to keep everything
off of Locust Grove right now because we are in a heck of a mess out there some days,
: How deep is your well Mr. McMillan?
Barbeiro: In regards to Mr. McMilan's comment about the access road through to the
east, as I recall they are allowed to build 165 homes without that access. Can not built
the 166 home until that access is complete.
Borup: That did change. That got modified at City Council.
~
Barbeiro: Right, so Mr. McMillan O'Neill can build 165 homes prior to that access to the
east.
Fox: My name is Allen Fox. I live at 1840 Cadillac Drive. My concern is basically the
same as Reese had to say, Jabil uses our road to come down to work so in the
morning you've got traffic backing up to the east now on Franklin. People trying to turn
in on Locust Grove so they can go to work at Jabil. Now, instead of backing up from the
west on Eagle, you - have to the east on Locust now. I would like to see that road
__ shoved cut also to try to help aleve some of the traffic. If you had this 165 homes or
'" -.
'64 homes your putting in here coming down Franklin, you people were nice enough to
give us a 93 apartment buildfhg on the corner of Locust Grove and Franklin, which is
going to be starting pretty soon I'm sure. Everything was passed on it. There is some
more coming out right on to that road. As far as irrigation water, the irrigation water
goes off the end of September, first of October and he will not see any pumped out at
Five Mile Creek. I can all most guarantee it. His water right now is in our irrigation
ditch. It will be taken out of our irrigation ditch and dumped into Five Mile Creek
upstream. That is where his water will come from. That is alii have.
(,)
Barbeiro: Mr. Fox, just for the record I want to remind you that the 93 unit apartment
I complex was recommended for denial by the Planning and ZoninQ Commission.
.
~
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8, 2000
Page 69
!'
Fox: First time around it was recommended to pass through and then it came back to
you and was denied and then it was through again.
McMillan: My name is Belle McMillan and I live at 870 S. Locust Grove. Talking about ~
the water, ours is so hard that we have a little fountain by the patio and if any of that
water splashes on my plants, it kills my plants. It is 27 grains and we have to have a
water softener inside. When I first started washing my dishes, it look like they had been
in a fire. They looks like they were smoked up and come to find out it was the hard
water. Meridian water is hard anyway, and ours is really hard. I can't have plants
around my fountain. I thought I might mention that. It is another problem.
Lindly: I am Mervin Lindly, I live at 1790 Cadillac Drive. I guess what I have basically
is a question. We have an irrigation ditch (away from microphone). If they divert their
share of the water from this ditch, that certainly changes our situation. I guess I have
questions about traffic lights on Locust Grove either at Franklin or at and or at the
Subdivision or even for that matter down where the Jabil Company people come in. I
am also wondering about the fencing on the Subdivision and how many more houses
will there be built on this property. Thank you.
Borup: Thank you. Anyone else? Mr. O'Neill any final response?
O'Neill: In response to a couple of the comments. Traffic was dealt with. I think you
guys referred back to the record and there are specific conditions about a secondary
approval when that needs to be put in, etc. I think that addresses that. We are in
agreement that in order for us to market and sell this property we've got to work hard to
provide a solution cil Franklin Locust Grove intersection so people want to live in our
community not,be stuck in traffic here. We are working really hard to help solve that
problem, In terms of irrigation we do have a well on the property. We did not plan to
use it for irrigation. We were planning on abandoning it. That is something we can
~,
rese~rch and as Mr. Freckleton said, we might be able to use that to provide our year
arou~nd irrigation. We will look into that. In terms of Mr. lindly comments, there is 165;'
planned homes for this first phase. For the second phase, we have the approval to do
up to 283 units for the entire project so we will do the difference. That is 143 or
whatever that is for the second phase. In terms of fencing, we will submit a detailed
fencing plan. We are intending on the first phase of putting boundary fencing around
the entire boundary. That is one of the conditions that was put on us so we are willing
to do that.
Borup: Thank you. Any questions Commissioner's? Has that been determined, the
type of fence? Six foot solid. What is your pleasure at this point.
;I;
Hatcher: Mr. Chairman I move we close the public hearing.
~.it(
Barbeiro: I second the motion.
,<
~,
:~
\I
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 70
Borup: All in favor?
Ii
:1
MOl'ION CARRIED: ALL AYES
'i
Borup: Okay, I think the concern was how to handle the staff comments and OEl's
response to those. I don't know if we want to try to reword it. In my mind I think there
was agreement on both sides on either as it's written or staff said it could be re-written,
Probably Items 9 and 10 and those were-both of those were information wasn't
available,
~'il~
Hatcher: Say that again. Staff agreed that it could be re-written?
Borup: I think some of the comments they thought the wording could be. Am I putting
words in someone's mouth? Did staff feel that there was substantial agreement on
everything or that they could be worked out on all the other items.
Freckleton: We do. We feel that we've kicked this dog enough. I think with the
exception of 9 and 10, yes we feel comfortable with.
Hatcher: Comfortable with what Bruce? Comfortable with our discussion. Comfortable
with OEl's response letter?
Freckleton: I think comfortable with the discussion.
.
Hatcher: So if legal counsel rights recommendation to the City for approval, we will
have him refer back tcrour hour long discussion. If I am going to put a motion together
here, I am trying to gather this up.
Freckleton: Staff could put these discussions, basically paraphrase what we have
talked about tonight, put thert'fin writing and submit those to legal counsel if that would
work for you guys.
~ ~i ~
Borup: Would that be reviewed by the applicant somewhere in there?
Freckleton: Cc it to the applicant.
~ Hatcher: How do we recommend approval based off of something we don't see?
Borup: Well we recommend-we've done it before. Essentially with having staff work it
out, yeah.
Freckleton: Mr. Chairman, did we determine that if they did come on the 22nd they
would still be able to make their council -
"
~
:;
~
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 71 '3.'
Borup: No, we don't have legal notification time. What starts the date when the
notification needs to be done? Can you send out notices prior to the 22nd, Assuming
that we are going to recommend to City Council. So there is still some hesitation,
Hatcher: I don't have hesitation so much as--
:I
Borup: I hope we didn't go through this whole thing for nothing.
Hatcher: Not so much hesitation-
Swartley: Mr. Chairman I have an idea. Could you open up the discussion again so
Derrick could come back up and I could ask him real quickly. Let's see how good my
note taking is.
..
Borup: Re-open the public hearing and call Mr. O'Neill forward, Do I need a motion for
that? Can I open that without a motion? Okay, would anyone like to make that motion.
Hatcher: Mr, Chairman I motion that we re-open the public hearing.
Barbeiro: Second the motion.
Borup: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
Swartley: Okay. On number 3 we agreed a variance was going to be okay, correct?
"
~-~
O'Neill: uet me get to my -
Brown: It requires a variance.
Swartley: Requires a variance. Same with number 4, correct?
Borup: No, that is not a variance.
Swartley: Oh, I am sorry. Excuse me. My fault. Five Brad agreed it was okay,
correct?
O'Neill: Yes.
III
Swartley: Six Brad agreed it was okay?
O'Neill: Yes.
~
Swartly: Seven Brad agreed it was okay?
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 72
O'Neill: Yes,
Swartley: Nine and ten will be taking care of about something to the effect of subject to
an assessment and I will try to work the language out. Okay,
O'Neill: I'm okay it will be agreed on, yes,
Swartley: And then, 14. I don't have anything written there. Brad were you okay on
that one also?
Borup: 14 was just Meridian would work to agreement with them-Nampa Meridian.
Swartly: That's it. If you want to approve that, I can do the recommendation that way,
(t
Hawkins Clark: I'm sorry. Number 7, I do not have any answer on whether or not
(Inaudible) is for private cause that has always been required.
Swartley: And that again, City Council and Mr. Gigray will probably address that. Okay,
Borup: We could address that in our recommendation too, couldn't we? Whether it
means anything, I don't know,
Swartley: Yeah, if you want to take the time to. You want to close it, go ahead.
Fox: I am Carol Fox, I live at 1840 Cadillac Drive adjacent to the south side of the
Subdivision. My major concern is the traffic problems. Are we addressing the road
situation at all.
Borup: That was addressed previously.
Fox: But it was said if you kept it at 164<'homes he did not have to put any additional-
the one exit and entry road onto Locust Grove was the only one he needed at this point
until phase 2 went in. That is going to leave another 700 or 800 car trips going through,
and that is disregarding Cobblestone Village or apartment complex, onto that road. It is
going to be total gridlock. We are not going to be able to get out of this Subdivision. It
is going to be a joke. It is getting to be that way all ready. Are we just going to leave
this go and say there is no-they have one exit and entry for 164 homes. ~
~,
. "y
Borup: But you don't live in that Subdivision. Your worried about the people that live
there you mean.
Fox: No I am worried about where I'm at. I am Iiving-
Borup: I understand where your living now. But you're the one that is going to keep
them from getting out. They are not going to keep you from getting out.
<;'
1.<
".
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 73
Fox: They are going to keep me from getting out because our Subdivision is a dead
end Subdivision, We are between the Subdivision proposed and the freeway. With the
added traffic on this road right now, we can't get out of our Subdivision, We only have
one way of getting out of ours, When you add another 300 homes with 4 vehicles per
home or 4-5 trips out, you're a gridlock,
Borup: Any questions for Mrs, Fox? Thank you.
Brown: The only comment that I can make is that the developer has been giveQ
approval previously with a conditional use permit that said that he can put that many
units in before a secondary access was required. It is an agreement that caused the
developer to go out and come to this point being a preliminary plat. With the guidelines
that he could do that he viewed that as being viable. I understand the problem that that
creates and I understand where the problem is at and I think Mr. O'Neill spoke to that it
is to their benefit to work with you and the other people that are along Locust Grove to
help that situation.
Borup: The purpose of this meeting is to review the plat. The design, the lot layout, the
amenities, that is what the applicant is here for today.
Norton: II move that the public hearing be closed.
Barbeiro: I second it.
Borup: All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES
.
Borup: Okay. The attorney mentioned that he feels he can prepare, unless the
commission wants to make any clarifications on probably item number 7 was the only
one that I think Brad mentioned he did not -
Hatcher: Mr. Chairman, if there is no further discussion on this I am ready to make a
motion.
Borup: Go ahead and make the motion.
Hatcher: I recommend by motion that we recommend q,pproval to City Council on the
preliminary plat of the Woodbridge Subdivision, which includes 164 lots on 50.9 acres
by Woodbridge Community, LLC to include staff comments subject to attorney's
discussion with developer.
=-=
Barbeiro: I second the motion.
::,t;
Borup: Discussion.
'"
~
iil .
l"
Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission
February 8,2000
Page 74
Brown: Mr. Chairman, if I understand this correctly, a lot of these items really don't
even apply that the applicant brought up. Am I correct in understanding what this
motion is, For example, like the street lights. They clarified that they were speaking the
same language on the street lights.
.
Borup: Right Yes,
Brown: They clarified that we can't do anything about the applicants request for three
because that (Inaudible) requirement Did we clarify that 5 with the retention pond and
the open space that we are basically speaking the same thing.
.
Borup: That is my understanding.
Brown: The detailed fencing plan on Locust Grove we now agree what's said in the
staff report is accurate.
Borup: Fencing and landscape on Locust Grove would be provided. The interior
amenity landscaping would not be provided-a typical but they want some leeway in
designing.
Brown: And then 7 is - basically per staff's recommendations.
..
.
Borup: I would have to agree with the applicant on that I am not sure why we are
looking for bonding for private improvements within the Subdivision. Their clubhouse,
volleyball court and that stuff. That is one of their amenities.
Brown: But, because we don't know that that's not the case, as I understand the motion
it is yet tl!l'be determined, right.
Borup: Yes, or we could add our own recommendation in there, which ever way we
feel. Whether it would .nave any force-there is some specific legal requirement then
our motion would be mute.
Brown: Nine and ten have to do with the financial assessment that is called out by code
and the interpretation thereof.
Borup: Nine is. Ten is just that the City will-wait a minute. Yes.
Brown: And then they are in agreement with 14.
~~
Borup: Any other discussion? Any addition or modification of the motion? If not I hope
for a vote. All in favor?
MOTION CARRIED: 3 AYES 1 NAY
"
:i
WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P,A,
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
JULIE KLEIN FISCHER
WM, F. GIORAY, III
BRENT JOHNSON
D, SA!.lUEL JOHNSON
WILLIAM A, MORROW
WILLIAM F, NICHOLS.
CHRISTOPHER S, NYE
PHILIP A. PETERSON
STEPHEN L. PRuss
ERIC S, ROSSMAN
TODD A. ROSSMAN
DAVID M, SWARTLEY
TERRENCE R, WHITE..
200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE, SUITE 31
POST OFFICE BOX 1150
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83680-1150
TEL (208) 288-2499
FAx (208) 288.2501
NAMPA OFFICE
104 NINTH'iWENUE SOUTH
POST OFFICE BOX 247
NAMPA, IDAHO 83653-0247
TEL (208) 466.9272
FAX (208) 466-4405
Eriilril via~ @~corn
"ALSO ADMITTED IN OR
""ALSO ADMITTEIJ IN WA
February 22, 2000
PLEASE REPLY TO
MERIDIAN OFFICE
To: Staff
Applicant
Mfected Property Owner( s)
Re: Application Case No. PP-OO-003
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION
Staff, Applicant and/or Mfected Property Owner(s):
Please note that these Findin~ and Recommendations of the Planning and
Zoning Commission shall be presented to the Ciry Council at the public hearing on the above
referenced matter by the Planning and Zoning Administrator. Due to the volume of matters
which the City Council must deciae, and to insure your position is understood and clear, it is
important to have a consistent format by which matters are presented at the public hearings
before the City Council.
The City Council strongly recommends:
1.
That you take time to carefully review the Findings and
Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, and be
prepared to state your position on this application by addressing the
Findings and Recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission;
and
2.
That you carefully complete (be sure it is legible) the Position
Statement if you dIsagree with the Findings and'"R.ecommendations
of the Plannmg and Zoning Commission. The Position Statement
form for this application is available at the City Clerk's office.
It is recommended that you prepare a Position Statement and deliver it to the
City Clerk prior to the hearing, if possible. If tliat is not possible, please present your Position
Statement to the City Council at the hearing, along with eight (8) copies. The copies will be
presented to the Mayor, Council, Planning and Zoning Administrator, Public Works and the
City Attorney. If you are a part of a group, it is strongly recommended that one Position
Statement be filled out for the group, wIDch can be signed by the representative for the group.
~:\Work\M\M.ridi8n 15360M\PLANNING AND ZONING FILE\PZP""tionSt1l1<:m.nt.Ltr
<'l
.
1t
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
...
':<l;
I.
acres
at
own'er
r
owner
II
as
.
,.
.
II,
.r
..
.
.
~
to
manner: a
are no
or
to
as
.
to
1.
1.1
1
.
1
our
a
1
1
~
..
~
~l'
I
1
l.8
1
l.IO
it-
easement
to
0;
~
.
~1
1.11
1.12
1.13
,.
1.14
1.15
a
12
are
~
a or~el:P source a
to-the culin::trv.water system shall,be renuired. Ifi-a single-p,oint
r - . ...7' -.. I - .... -~. · - ~ ..-
connection is-utilized, tire de~oper shalllbe responsibie tor tpe
assessments common areas to
water
to water
on
asa
a
are set a
.
~
,~
.
.
.
~
1.16
'.~
1.17
,
1.18
'"
it
.
"
..
on
use
on a use
floodwaj fringelareas.causjng heights not
on effect of -the sin~ u!e acting alone,.but.u~on r~asomible
assumpfurn..thatlot!Snandowners.Wijliit\~the floodnlain may. n~d/o
...... . ~ . - r ~..I. · iiiL~ --Iii ·
allowed.to.deveIop to enuivarent exten within thdfloodwav.anCl,
.. .'1. . 'J'.
tHerefore, the accumulativ~ effects encroachments must
A
.,
.
'.<11\
II[~
numerous
an
not
1.19
'.il:I
to all tenns
as
as
.
~
2.1
areas
name
one
or out.
.
.
as
1
Runloff not to create a
a
to
water
.
;0:
.~ ~~
'" I
oC
quality,
3.3 The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject
project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater
disposal and design a stormwam management system that prevents
groundwater and surface water degradation.
Z:\WoI\~~ 15360M\WoodbridgiC Community\PPlat.Ric
.
.
.
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL - 7
PRELIMINARY PlAT -PllELIMINAR~ PlAT FOR WOODBRIDGE
SUBDMSIqN BY WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY, L.L.C,
I ·
:t
.":;...
r.
cE'
Ada Count JJi hwa'j :J)i6tricf
.",
Judy Peavey-Derr, President
Dave Bivens, Vice President
Marlyss Meyer, Secretary
Sherry R. Huber, Commissioner
Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner
318 East 37th Street
Garden City, Idaho 83714-6499
· Phone (208) 387-6100
Fax (208) 387-6391
f?:~rT1ail: tellus@achd.ada,id.us
February 16, 2000
TO:
. .. ,9th St., Suite 300
Boise, 10 83702
FROM:
Steve Arnold, Principal Development Analyst
Planning & Development
~~
. .~...~^:~::...:.:~
...... ..
SUBJECT:
,,~,.... e, 1/4 mile South of Franklin Rd.
I ~ ~'
On February 9,'2000, the Commissioners'of the;'Kda'County Highway District (hereafter called
"District") took action on the preliminary Plat as stated on the attached staff report,
( I >.w :~~~~.. ~ .rl.~~/~;. ;::"y':
In order that the Final ~Plat rnaYb~~Onsidered, b"'y the District lor-'acceptance, fhe DeveIBp'er'shall
cause the following ap~licable standard conditions tocbe satisfied' prior to Distrfcl certification and
endorsement,' ,.,. ".' :j ", .. '."., A<^. ._,..," '." "
1, Drainage plans shall be submitted and subject to review and approval by the
District.
~ ....
2. If public street improvements are reguired: Prior to any construction within the
existing or proposed public right-of-way, the following shall be submitted and subj~ct
to review and approval by the District.
"
a, Three complete sets of detailed street construction drawings prepared by an
Idaho registered professional Engineer.
b,
Execute and Inspection Agreement between the Developer and the District
together with initial payment deposit for inspection and/or testing services,
:-:-~, ..
~ :.,~::~,
c.
Complete all street improven:ents to the satisfaction of the District, or
execute a Surety Agreemenf'between..the Developer and the DistriCt to
guarantee the, completion of" the" construction of all required street
improvements,
:"."': ~~ ~~~ :-:-: V~it :::-:
~~ :': :--:x"=:. ", ~~ . >iI
::.....: : l
~:t.....~~ x~.
: 3. Furnish a copy of the Final Plat showing street names as approved by the Local
Government Agency having such authority together with the payment of fee
charged for the manufacturing and installation of all street signs,
~ :
:.~ ."'~.":.~^' ~ 1;:,L!~ . xj">i ...
:x;...." ::;;,:.... ^ .. >>-:-:
~.:t::\~;'-:: -*:-:. : l....,../~ ~~ I,~!~q\: .;.;.i~ ..~~.~:~~~ ::,4:::: ~,.lo.~~r::~~ :~.~
: 1 :::: ~:,".
:::f
:,-~. ~,~
~.
;j;.
;.~
i:.:::
:iIf:
~
~J:'
~~f'
If Public Right-of-Way Trust Fund deposit is required, make the deposit to the
District in the form of cash or cashier's check for the amount specified by the
District..
!;~~
\~VA
Furnish easements, agreements and all other datum or documents as required by
the District.
::.4:,
~
Furnish Final Plat drawings togethe'r with the plat and plan review fees for District
acceptance and endorsement. The final plat must contain the signed endorsement
of the Owner and the Land Surveyor's certification.
7.
All of th~ material ~ be submitted to District staff two-wee'ks prior to Commission
review of the final plat. ..
8.
Approval of the plat is valid for one year. The Commission will consider an extension
of one year if requested within 15-days prior to the expiration date.
Please contact me at (208) 387-6170, should you have any questions.
Cc: Planning & Develop~e~_t Chren/File
:;;:.~~.!
~., -:
'ii
:;;,'!!::.~
'"
~-'
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
Planning and Development Division
Development Application Report
Preliminary Plat- Woodbridge Subdivision ~cust Grove Road s/o Franklin Road
~ ~
Woodbridge Subdivision is a 164-lot residential subdivision on 50,9-acres. The site is located on
the east side of Locust Grove Road approximately 1/4 mile south of FrankIin Road, This
development is estimated to generate 1,640 additional vehicle trips per day based on the
submitted traffic study.
'"
On November 17, 1999, the Commission reviewed MAZ99-20/MCUP99-037, a request for
conditional use approval and rezone approval for a 283-Iot residential subdivision on 80,83-
acres. The subject application is a subdivision for the western portion ofthe previously approved
rezone and conditionai use application. That development was estimated to generate 2,871
additional vehicle trips per day based on the submitted traffic study,
"
11
Roads impacted by this development:
Locust Grove Road
Franklin Road
Weatherby Drive
Autumn Way
ACHD Commission Date - February 9, 2000 - 7:00 p.m.
~;
-,~~;!-,"-k:,-~~~. ,
...
UJ
>
o
a::
t')
~ "-~==u--- ~
.:::J 111.'-"""'" - -- 1.i
g ..ll:~1 ~-
...J '" ~ ~r--~-_'"
r
~
i)t
C"
~
(j
~
t
~
~
~>liil
j,:.t::!
.._~
..... -.1"'1'
-'.~.1
:r.:
~~'~
~
~ == ~
:;;
SECTION 17J!II.I3N.81 E,
.~
.,.. ~
. ..........___.._....c..lII
....c......._........__._
."..... .........-~_.
----.... --.-........
.....----....
~
'"
Q,
I ,~
-. ,
. .
I<
;)i
~
~
~
~
~
CoG
m:
~"Bi
l, .~
~\.l!~
~+~
!'":~
\;-
L \ic~
". \L:~ I
\
I
R1
i
!
i
j
!
i
------'
~
I
I
!
I
- C-Gf
~
--R~
CI
~
r--.
\
I::
:;.1
,T,
:;0
~:
:+:
.j
ll".
- '" 1ik
"!.1 "'
t.. -.
"
,
--4",,-
:-5: i6!1f;;i ~
~
s. ...
,~
,@
'"
I
".. ~
.~ -;;&;
~
l!!!!~'J,
rn-l-o~ =~p
~ I '"
I: ~,. I
Ir
~ .-.11
Lot!
,i Ii
'"
Ii j : I] II
j' : II
Toothman-Orton Eng Co.
208 323 2399
P.02
..........""\
\ /,,[
.......~~
LJ
!;)
~
'" "
,
I
I.
I::
~~~
i:" I
>::
:-------
,l
!:;
~'t:1
~li
~
'11()~~ ..J,.. rn, q 7
..'..jt...._....
jl .
"
ti'.'
~
~Y;
.'f.I!"'
I I . w --,-_...
, .y,.. <<>
. .
I 1 I"
~ ~.
-., it i t J I [i i 1- ",
n ilnn!Hd~i ~~.
, t: i h. , Ii ~ '1'. L ~ t t ~,
,qfP I till. ~
id~! i d
. II ~ ~
.' r i
i
[
HllmilSiIl I
;j:i;,..l'....~~,.r.
~!~!~'~r~ ~
' . ~.
~ ~ : ii' ,
t .
; J E'
. . , ~'
,....
. '~",_~Jy' ,
~,
~..
'" .
<JIl)1 ..t H 'iill
It. .'
~'
" 111 111
~ I q ." : :
'l .' .
j 1 , ; "Q
l( :f i It' .
I
f ,~ f ~
JJ
ii ij ; i .: U i ii 1i J.
~; .~~ la ~ R I ~IAJ
~; ~~ 1 i' ~ ;; 1:". ~i ~f
'i~; . J !U~ -~j.
~ t .. ~.6 _.!I'
~ :,1:; n~ ~ ~ii
· J ..1 a .i1i;'
:,. · f f Ja . r I
· I . " il it ~I
! n !II i ft!E
1 I~ II ~ ! I d
, i ~ i I .. ~. mt
..1 s I' r!.
II qil'l
2f 1":1'
I II II~'
;l; r;, J III l'
i. i . i f .
"1 f P
I I 1 !
....OODBRlDGE PHASE
PREWWN~Y PLAT
~ . pRIDIAN. IDAHO
Ii. ./1. '"' '/< II",!:,!" ... T.'... 1IJ;>.t., !PiM.. . CII1IffT
s
'"
.',
~ ' -
:." ir~' ."'. ...
.-,:)"1 ~
..;~;.- fill :
'::' 1.-..:::
f'l>_()~
"",7", <;>i lJ ~ :
(,s.. '" L
~I., 1- ..;-')
;; ! n! j ;1 :.;:/~ ill, '1:31
i I ~ ~lJii!!lIIA! 1.1 i r'i 'I~ ,0
"., ., ~ I zrt r~ '*HII'! ~: i.", ,"'." ,t,....I~___
... It tE · r : ' ~~ i i ~(~~. i' .-fl..; .....,..1 "'.
a II II '. t f ~ i ; OJ - :~ ~ .'" .. .t~"~ - rl {
,f; .. i,f i..J-L.,.. .. h- lY ·
, b"~:l"~ f " IIiI : :. I
~~,~'i.i' g ~i I ~--- ~
'" J.t""l ~.iIII f . ~ :;. r-:
.. ,"" ~ '~I-U,j,~ ~ .' . !,' ~~III . t, ~ I'
'. ;~.' Hi &fill f . ii} ~~I '" !'J , 15
Yf i'U .,a~ b; "..:~! ~
,;Jr, q It i U IT 6 . i :.~ " " · f.i i)",' ---;
_J!II' j;~tF :'.!'I';~~'/ ~ -r~;
~r 'It I, '!Il~ l--'
'"' ~ ..~ p p ~ ,;- ' . " ; OJ ,
" ~-":< it (j. it. ;>If ~"~I' . I
'3: /-. '!i I J - -~~~ . "':':if
..I ~ I ;<j .' i!i 'It .~
..r~.'~-'~.~ .... ,~ .j...1~ __ .......-- ._ ~ ~
-"'-,'-- ~~' -~ -;,,-.~~-
. ~ -' . I' - ""!>; '//./,-,r
L~~' I i~ . ,
__c..J.",,_ ~ I
.' 2!: ,
.I I
I I
,
:':4
"
[(,
~.z.~
~
t.~
.w
oj ~
'V
,)l'
,"
-G
...,'
III
'!'ClIITIIlu.N-ORTDN 'ZNG~G COIlPANY .
_!, '...
.."Ir .
, . 11:". .6,
~
;0
_..._~-tl.NOiIitIs
='t ';8"aJ~
i:"~~_
o.tus Ill!
1Ik:M.L CWfO
CQ[UR c"A(.III[, 11M><<)
~.'
.~
~
Facts and Findings:
A General Information
Owner - Woodbridge Community, LLC
Applicant -Same,
R-4 - Existing "'zoning
50.9 - Acres
164 - Proposed building lots
12,700 - Total lineal feet ofp1roposed public streets
283 - Traffic Analysis Zone (T AZ)
".
West Ada - Impact Fee Service Area
M' Meridian - Impact Fee Assessment District
Frinklin Road
Minor arterial with bike lane designation
Traffic count 11,494 on 10-6-99
O-feet of frontage
~
~
'"
Franklin Road is improved with two lanes between Eagle Road and Locust Grove Road,
Locust Grove Road
Minor arterial with bike lane designation
No traffic count available
1 ,325 - feet 0 f frontage
50-feet existing right-of-way (25-feet from centerline)
96-feet required right-of-way (48-feet from centerline)
'"
Locust Grove Road is improved with 24-feet of pavement with no curb, gutter or sidewalk.
B.
Utility street cuts in new pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in
writing by the District. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file numbers) for
details.
.
C. The applicant has submitted a very thorough traffic analysis for the entire project. The key ~
findings of the analysis include:
..
This.phase of the proposed project is expected to generate 1,640 daily vehicle trips at
full build-out.
The proposed project includes a residential collector street as access to Locust Grove
Road and local street access (stub street) to a future connection to the east.
There are no stub streets to the south nor any clear potential for the constmction of a
future connection,
Because the project has only one connection to Locust Grove Road and no definite
minor connection to the east or the north, this project site is essentially one cul-de-sac,
,.
..
..
..
e;
.
WOODBRGE,CM2
Page 2
~
A
~
':\
>~
;./
:~:
,.
The District has a policy limiting the number of daily vehicle trips to 2,500 vehicle trips
for a residential collector roadway, This project, at full buildout, generates 2,871 daily
vehicle trips per day. A second access is needed to provide for the safety and
convenience of the residents and allow full development of this site.
The District has a policy limiting the number daily vehicle trips to 1,000 which can be
safely accommodated on a roadway with front-on housing. The internal roadway
system wirI result in traffic volumes exceeding this limit between Locust Grove Road
and the fourth internal intersection, Front-on housing must be prohibited on the internal
residential collector roadway between Locust Grove Road and the fourth internal
intersection.
The Franklin Road/Locust Grove Road intersection operates at an acceptable level of
service under "existing" conditi9ns, A traffic signal is not warranted at this time,
The Franklin Road/Locust Grov~ Road intersection is expected to operate at an
acceptable levellllOf service under "existing plus project" conditions. A traffic signal is
not warranted under "existing plus project" conditions. _
The site's traffic volumes justify the construction of a center turn-lane (for southbound
traffic) on Locust Grove Road at the main site driveway abutting the project site.
The site's traffic volumes do not justify the construction of a northbound deceleration
lane (for northbound traffic) on Locust Grove Road at the main site driveway abutting
the project site.
(-:-~
,.
,.
,.
,.
,.
D. The entire project is one cul-de-sac. The applicant should be required to limit the development
to 250 homes until such time as a second public street access is provided.
E. At th~November 17, 1999 Commission meeting, the applicant requested a variance from
District policy requiring a concrete sidewalk along Locust Grove Road abutting the project.
The Commission granted this request and allowed the developer to construct an 8-foot wide
(miniIl1um) asphalt pathway along Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel. The Commission
specified the asphalt pathway was allowed provided the homeowners association of this
development be required to provide perpetual maintenance on the asphalt pathway,
F,
Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat
should be owned and maintained by a homeowners association. Notes of this should be
required on the final plat. ..
9
G. Unless otherwise approved, the applicant should be required to construct all public roads within
the subdivision as 36-foot street sections with curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks
within 50-feet of right-of-way.
H. The applicant is proposing to construct the following streets as reduced street sections:
.
.
Bollman Way
Pratt Way
Warren Place
Baltimore Drive
Pegram Drive
The District accepts local residential public roads with a 29-foot street ~ection with parking
prohibited on one side, if the amount of vehicle trips per day on the street do not exceed 1,000
VTD or less. The proposed density of development that will utilize each of the above-
WOODBRGE.CM2
Page 3
...
~
',",
!.Ii...
II
mentioned streets will generate less than 1,000 vehicle trips per day. These interior streets may
be constructed as proposed with a 29-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide
concrete sidewalk within 50-feet of right-of-way and located as proposed. Parking should be
restricted on one side of each of the roadways. A signage plan should be submitted for review
and approval by Planning and Development staff.
Ii1
1. The applicant is proposing a turnaround at the southern terminus of Warren Place. The
turnaround should be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. The
applicant should also be required to provide a minimum of a 21-foot street section (as measured
from back of curb to back of curb) on either side of any center islands within the turnarounds.
The medians should be constructed a minimum of 4- feet wide to total a minimum of a 100-
square foot area, Dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way plus the additional width of the median, The
applicant will be required to provide the~written approval, for the design of the turnaround,
from the emergency fire service for the area where the development is located.
1. The applicant is proposing to locate Woodbridge Drive off Locust Grove Road approximately
700-feet north qfthe south property line, The location of Woodbridge Drive meets District
policy. The median within Woodbridge Drive off Locust Road should be designed with two
21-foot street sections (as measured from back of curb to back of curb) on either side of the
center median and the median should be constructed a minimum of 4- feet wide to total a 100-
square foot area. The applicant will be required to dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way plus the
additional width of the median.
II
K.
At the November 17,1999 Commission meeting, the applicant requested that the Commission
approve an 8-foot wide asphalt pathway on one side of Woodbridge Driv~rom Locust Grove
RoacJ.to Warren Place in lieu of the required concrete sidewalk. The sidewalk requirement
would be deleted from the other side of the roadway. The Commission granted the applicant's
request provided there was the establishment of a homeowners association that would maintain
the pathway in perpetuity, and the applicant provided pedestrian crossings at all four of the
internal intersections east of Locust Grove Road. Coordinate the design ofthe pedestrian
pathway and the design otih'e pedestrian crossings at the intersections with District staff.
L.
I
The applicant is proposing four intersections off Woodbridge Drive with medians within the
entrances, The medians within the entrances off Woodbridge Drive should be designed with
two 21-foot street sections (as measured from back of curb to back of curb) on either side of the
center median and the median should be constructed a minimum of 4- feet wide to total a 100-
square foot area. The applicant will be required to dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way plus the
additional width of the median.
.
M. In order to accommodate the left-turning traffic from Locust Grove Road into the development,
the applicant should be required to construct a center turn lane on Locust Grove Road for the
Woodbridge Drive/Locust Grove Road intersection, The turn lane should be constructed to
provide a minimum of 1 OO-feet of storage with shadow tapers for both the approach and
departure directions, Coordinate the design of the turn lane with District staff.
.
N. Based on the submitted traffic study, the main east/west street segment between Locust Grove
Road and the fourth internal intersection should be designated as a residential co~JIector street
<
WOODBRGE,CM2
Page 4
~
~
'I'!.~
with no front-on housing, because the anticipated traffic volumes exceed 1,000 vehicle trips per
day. The access restrictions for this street segment should be stated on the final plat. District
policy requires that this street segment be constmcted as a 36-foot street section with curb,
gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks or a pathway as approved in MCUP99-037 (see Fact
and Finding K). Unless otherwise noted, parking should be prohibited on this street segment.
Coordinate the signage plan with District staff.
~
O. The applicant is proposing to terminate Woodbridge Drive, at Five Mile Creek for the subject
phase of development. The road is proposed to be extended further to the east in a future phase
of development (see approval for MCUP99-037), The applicant will be required to constmct or
bond for the required box culvert over the Five Mile Creek prior to final plat approval. The
applicant may reduce the street section over the bridge to a minimum width of 25-feet with
'"
curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Coordinate the design of the bridge over the Five Mile Creek
with District staff
P. The applicant is proposing a community center on Lot 66, Block 3, across from Warren Place.
The applicant should be required to align a driveway to the community cep,ter on Woodbridge
Drive with Warren Place on the south side of the road. Coordinate the design and location of
the driveway with District staff
Q. The existing transportation system will be adequate to accommodate the additional traffic
generated by this proposed development with the requirements outlined within this report.
'"
The following Site Specific Requirements and Standard Requirements must be met or provided
for prior to ACHD approval of the final plat: ))>x,
Site Specific Requirements:
1. Dedicate 48-feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Locust Grove Road abutting the parcel
by means of recordation of a final subdivision plat or execution of a warranty deed prior to
issuance of a building permit (or other required permits), whichever occurs first. Allow up to
30 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material.
The owner will be compensated for all right-of-way dedicated as an addition to existing right-
of-way from available impact fee revenues in this benefit zone, if the owner submits a letter of
application to the impa<!t fee administrator prior to breaking ground, in accordance with Section
15 of ACHD Ordinance #193.
i~l
2. Constmct or bond for an 8-foot wide (minimum) pathway along Locust Grove Road abutting
the parcel (approximately 1,325-feet), The pathway may be constructed of asphaltic concrete,
if the homeowners association for this development is required to provide perpetual
maintenance for the asphalt pathway, Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk
with Distridstaff.
3, AIJY proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat
shall be owned and maintained by a homeowners association, Notes of this should be required
on the final plat.
A
WOODBRGE,CM2
Page 5
~I
~
~
. Constmct the following streets:
.
~
~
1
1&
~
II
.
.
Bollman Way
Pratt Way
Baltimore Drive
Pegram Drive
Warren Place
.,;.:
as 29-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk within 50-feet of
right-of-way and located as proposed. Parking shall be restricted on one side of each of the
roadways. A signage plan shall be submitted for review and approval by Planning and
Development staff.
Unless otherwise approved, the applicant shall be required to constmct all public roads within
the subdivision as 36-foot street section~ (as measured from back of curb to back of curb) with
curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide concrete sidewalks within 50-feet ofright-of-way.
In lieu of constmcting sidewalks on both sides of Woodbridge Drive from Locust Grove Road
to the Warren Place, the applicant may constm~~ an 8-foot wide (minimum) asphalt pathway qn
one side of the road only. Provide pedestrian cross walks at all four internal intersections of
Woodbridge Drive. The asphalt pathway shall be owned and perpetually maintained by a
homeowners association if it is constmcted of asphaltic concrete paving, Coordinate the
design of the pedestrian pathway and crosswalks with District staff.
Woodbridge Drive between Locust Grove Road and Warren Place shall be designated as a
residential collector street with no front-on housing. Access restrictions for this street segment
shall be stated on the final plat. District policy requires that this street segment be constmcted
as a 36-foot street section with curb, gutter and an 8-foot wide (minimum) asphalt pathway
along this segment ofthe residential collector. Unless otherwise noted, parking shall be
prohibited on this street segment. Coordinate the signage plan with District staff.
Constmct a turnaround at the southern terminus of Warren Place, The turnaround shall be
constmcted to provide a minimum outside turning radius of 45-feet. The applicant shall also be
required to provide a min1mum of a 21- foot street section (as measured from back of curb to
back of curb) on either side of any center islands within the turnaround. The median shall be
constmcted a minimum of 4-feet wide to total a minimum of a 100-square foot area. Dedicate
54-feet of right-of-way plus the additional width of tile median. Provide written approval of the
design of the turnaround from the emergency fire service for the area wh~ere the development is
located. ",
+
.
Locate the main project entrance off Locust Grove Road approximately 700-feet north of the
south property line. 'The street section on either side of shall be designed with a minimum of
two 21- foot street sections (as measured from back of curb to back of curb) on either side of the
center median and the median shall be constructed a minimum of 4-feet wide to total a 100-
square foot area. The applicant will be required to dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way plus the
additional width of the median.
The four intersections of [the main east/west road shall be designed with two 2 I-foot street
sections (as measured from back of curb to back 0 f curb) on either side of center!medians and
WOODBRGE,CM2
Page 6
~
ill
J!i
the medians shall be constructed a minimum of 4- feet wide to total a 1 aD-square foot area. The
applicant will be required to dedicate 54-feet of right-of-way plus the additional width of the .
median.
11. Construct a center turn lane on Locust Grove Road for the main project/Locust Grove Road
intersection. The'.turn lane shall be constructed to provide a minimum of 1 DO-feet of storage
with shadow tapers for both the approach and departure directions. Coordinate the design of
the turn lane with District staff.
;:;:!
12. Terminate Woodbridge Drive for this phase of development at Five Mile Creek. The road shall
be required to be extended further to the east in a future phase of development (see approval for
MCUP99-037). The applicant shall construct or bond for the required box culvert over the Five
Mile Creek prior to final plat approval. The applicant may reduce the street section over the
bridge to a minimum with of25-fee~with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. Coordinate the design
of the bridge witli District staff.
13,,, The applicant is proposing a community center on Lot 66, Block 3, across from Warren Place,
The applicant should be required to align a driveway to the community center on Woodbridge
Drive with Warren Place on the south side of the road. Coordinate the design and location of
the driveway with District staff.
14. Other than main project entrance off Locust Grove Road specifically approved with this
application, direct lot or parcel access to Locust Grove Road is prohibited. Lot access
restrictions, as required with this application, shall be stated on the final plat.
l'l
Standard Requirements:
1~
1.
A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein
shall be made in writing to the ACHD Planning and Development Supervisor. The reQq.est
shaH specifically identify each requ.irement to be reconsidered and include a written explanation
of why Sl!Ch ~ recwirement would result in i substantial h9rdship or ineQ].Iity, The written
request shall be submitted to the District no later th~n 9'00 a m on the day sched1J.led for
ACHD Commission action, Those items shall be rescheduled for discussion with the
Commission on the next available meeting agenda.
Requests submitted to the District after 9:00 a.m. on the day scheduled for Commission action
do not provide sufficient time for District staff to remove the item from the consent agenda and
report to the Commission regarding the requested modification, variance or waiver. Those
items will be acted on by the Commission unless removed from the agenda by the Commission.
2, After ACHD Commission action, any request for reconsideration of the Commission's action
shall be made in writing to the Planning and Development Supervisor within six days of the
action and shall include a minimum fee of $11 0.00, The re~uest for reconsideration shall
specifically identify each requirement to be reconsidered qjld include written documentation of
data that W.a6 not available to the Commission lilt the time of its ori~inal decision, The request
for reconsideration will be heard by the District Commission at the next regular:.peeting of the
..
WOODBRGE,CM2
Page 7
.-. ~ :.~rt.
{;i
"
'"
&l
~
~.
Commission. lfthe Commission agrees to reconsider the action, the applicant will be notified
of the date and time of the Commission meeting at which the reconsideration will be heard.
3, Payment of applicable road impact fees are required prior to building constmction in
accordance with Ordinance #193, also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact
Fee Ordinance.
;;
4. All design and constmction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District
Policy Manual, ISPWC Standards and approved supplements, Constmction Services
procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An
engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare cfhd certify all improvement plans.
!~
5. The applicant shall submit revised plans for staff approval, prior to issuance of building permit
(or other required permits), which incorporates any required design changes.
"
6. Constmction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable
requirements of~Jhe Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy.
7. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way.
Existing utilities damaged by the applicant shall be repaired by the applicant at no cost to
ACHD, The applicant shall be required to call DlGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full
business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact
ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD conduits (spare or filled) are
compromised during any phase of construction.
~)
8. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing
and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized
representative of the Ada County Highway District. The burden shall be upon the applicant to
obtain written confirmation of any change from the Ada County Highway District.
9.
Any change by the applicant in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this
application, shall require the applicant to comply with all rules, regulations, ordinances, plans,
or other regulatory and legal restrictions in force at the time the applicant or its successors in
interest advises the Highway District of its intent to change the planned use of the subject
property unless a waiver/variance of said requirements or other legal relief is granted pursuant
to the law in effect at the time the change in use is sought. "
~
II
:2
WOODBRGE.CM2
8
ill
Ii.l
.'
~
Conclusion of Law:
1. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed lise/development will not place an
undue burden on the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system within the vicinity
impacted by the proposed de~elopment.
Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Planning and Development
Division at 387-6170.
"" S\tbmitted by:
D8;te of Commission Action:
Steve Arnold
Febmary 9, 2000
~.;
~
~
'"
.
"
I:
II;
1,\
..:;~
"
.
WOODBRGE,CM2
Page 9
"
** TX Cr)I= I RtilT I (jJ.j REP~T **
AS ()lI I'm el7 '00 11:42 PPf,iiE.01
CITY CF ~RIDI~
~TE TImE TO/FR~
03 03/07 11: 34 RJ!U C flOJ1KS
04 03/1217 11:37 LEGAL DEPART~T
~ 1213/1217 11:4121 208BB86854
MGDE MIN/SEC PGS CMD~ STATUS
~--S 1211' 45" are il83 (}tC
EC--S 1212'42" 0eJ!5 003 OK
EC--S 1211'58" ~ 003 ()(
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
!-'l'i.
City of Meridian
City Clerk's Office
~
Phone: (208) 888-4433
Fax: (208) 888t1-218
Fax
To: f'flJtrl e;n e.
From: );he!blf
Fax:
Date:
Phone:
Paaes:
Re: fJ.Jo6iJrn d~
cc: rl, PW
~ro:
o URGENT 0 FOR REVIEW D FOR COMMENT 0 FOR REPLY
:JJus /:s Ii.- (~~ OE/ re~dti1t",. ,
rJ1/lflgtJ 1-0 ~ recnntnenMhUYtS Iv (. { -
';;y I-onl?-:-J rn~eh~t:~' ~ tn [5-i-ed il-
tv&rv J; Jeliv~red -the 1:-hrn Pa ckf:1- VYL.-
l7itU7f. -fAtVlt:--~r-
JM1h'r
uJ;\, ~
f
March 3, 2000
The Honorable Robert D, Corrie
Mayor of Meridian
Meridian City Council
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
.~~
Re: Woodbridge Preliminary Plat (PP-OO-003), Meridian, Idaho
~
Dear Mayor Corrie and City Council Members:
In opening, O'Neill Enterprises, Inc, (OEI) would like to thank Staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission
and the Mayor and Council for their respective efforts in reviewinlfthe development applications for
W90dbridge, This extraordinary effort is greatly appreciated by OEI and we feel that we have a better
project in Woodbridge because of it.
The attached document is a product of this effort and is intended to assist in the City Council's review of
the Preliminary Plat application for Woodbridge. The document identifies proposed modifications to the
"Recommendation to City Council", by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and represent a combination
of actions taken by the Planning and Zoning Commission and further discussions and clarifications
between Public Works Staff and OEL
It is important to note that, after reviewing the "Recommendation" from the Planning and Zoning
Commission, that a number of the actions taken by the Planning and Zoning Commission are not reflected
in the transmittal to City CounciL A review of the hearing transcript substantiates this concern,
In order to facilitate the discussion of these proposed modifications, we have provided a brief narrative
explaining the area of consideration and how we have arrived at the modification contained in the
document. It is important to note that OEI and our representatives have had extensive discussions with
Staff regarding the original "Staff Comments" and we feel that we are in agreement on the intent of the
proposed modifications,
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Derick O'Neill
President
Attachment
cc: Gary Smith, City Engineer
Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer
Brad Hawkins-Clark, Planner
Ed Miller, Esq,
City Attorney, White, Peterson, Pruss, Morrow & Gigray, P,A.
.... .;',:: ......_--._-'..:...........................................-., .'.'.:.;:.,Ilr'" :'.",:-.~. .... .....-. ...._-~ ..__...._~. ....,.... .'n" ............ ..... ................ 0.... ...
.... ::I:~'O..~~~~::::~:t:~...S:~~~:t, ..~ Ui!~:3??....~?i~~,I?~~.~~"Z?~,.~J ~g~)...???~?~?q~_f~~:g~~t,??,?~,?,~,~,~
Ji " rt'
.
~
Agreed Modifications to the Planning and Zoning Administrator's
and City Engineer's
Recommendations to City Council -
By the Planning and Zoning Commission
'I
ler Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting of 2-8-00 and Subsequent Meetings with Staff)
1,6 Sanitary sewer service to this site will be via the existing trunk main that traverses through the
development. Applicant will be responsible to construct lateral sewer mains to and through this
proposed development, this iHcludes the frontage along S. Locllst Grove Road. Subdivision designer to
coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. Sewer manholes are tEl 13e
pnnided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides oftha centerline, Applicant will also be
required to eJltefl:d aft eight meft. Saflitary seVier in a 20 foot vii de eommon lot between Lots 83 and 84,
Bloek 6 to proyide sewer access to an isolated portion of the adjacent Locllst View Seights
S1:HldivisioH. If seVier is to be extended bem'een Lots 56 and 57, Block 3 to the existing eight inch
ef0sstag, it shall be vlithin a 20 foot '.vide common lot. A minimum 14 foot 'llide, all weather access
.~ road shall be eonstructed centered oYer all sanitary se'lier mains outside the public right of way,
Applicant to include a note on his development plans to retain and protect the existing gravel access
roac! eyer the City of Meridiaft's Five~Mile Creek Sanitary Sewer Trnnk Line,
""
Narrative:
Discussions with the Planning and Zoning Commission at the Preliminary Plat Hearing and with Staff,
subsequent to the hearing, revealed that the above modification met the intent of the "Staff Comment".
Specific details (i.e, "main sizing and routing") are to be determined by Public Works Staff and the
subdivision designer through detailed engineering study and analysis. Furthermore, the City Engineer
agreed to look at alternatives to J) the provision of service to adjacent properties, 2) common lot
requirements, and 3) gravel access road requirements included in the original "Staff Comment" in a
meeting held with the applicant on February 25, 2000, It was determined that these alternatives could
be addressed as a part of the "main sizing and routing" discussions to be held as detailed engineering
plans are developed,
It was the applicant's understanding that the recommendation to City Council would read as modified
above, A review of the meeting transcript from the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing confirm
that the condition should have been changed accordingly.
;:;
1.7 Water service to this site will be via extensions of the existing main in Locust Grove Road to the south
or. Franklin Road to the north, Applicant will be responsible to construct the water mains to and
. through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with
the Public Works Department.
.
Narrative:
During the February 25, 2000 meeting with Public Works Staff, it was requested (by OEI) and agreed
(by Staff) that the applicant would have the option of extending water service from the north or south.
1.8 Developer shall indicate any existing ditch easements on the preliminary plat map, The boundaries of
the Five Mile Creek easement, need to be defmed. Five Mile Creek is-and the natural tributary of Five
Mile Creek are excluded from the piping requirement. Any deviation from this requirement is subject
to obtaining a variance from the City CounciL
Narrative:
A detailed review of the Subdivision and Development Ordinance subsequent to the Planning and
Zoning Commission hearing revealed that natural waterways are exempt from the tiling requirement,
The City Engineer has agreed that the tributary in question is a natural waterway and should therefore
- be exempt from the requirement. The modified condition above represents this agreement,
~~ ~ ~
I,ll A ~erimeter fencing plan, and ~detailed landscape plan for all landscaped areas Locust Grove
Road as well as a typical landscape plan for common areas, shall be submitted for review and approval
prior to st1:bmittal of the fmal plat map by Staff as required by the Development Agreement. A leMer of
credit Of cash sUfety will be req1:lired fef the impro"lemeffis prior to signature on the fInal plat.
Perimeter fenciflg shall be iflstalled prior to obtaiflffig 1:mildiflg permits,
~
Narrative:
Discussion with Planning Staff during the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on this
preliminary plat application revealed that the applicant was required by the approved Development
Agreement to provide a perimeter fencing plan and detailed landscape plan for Locust Grove Road,
not "all landscaped areas" as indicated by the condition. In addition to the requirement of the
Development Agreement, the applicant volunteered to submit a "typical" common area landscape
plan for Staff's review, '9,
The applicant understood from that hearing that the condition would be changed to reflect Staff's as
well as the applicant's comments and that the requirement would be enforced per the Development
Agreement that specifically states (by reference to the conditions of approval) that:
2.1.7
Locust Grove Landscaping Strip, The Developer shall install landscaping along Locust
Grove Road per the plans attached as illustrations 2 & 3 to the Master Site Plan or as
otherwise required by A CHD. Developer shall construct the landscape buffer generally
consistent with these plans in lieu of the twenty (20) foot "landscaping strip"
requirement of Meridian City Code 11-9-605,0. Developer shall submit detailed
landscape plans consistent with illustrations 2 and 3 for City Staff approval.
Fencing 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,
2.1,26
..~
Per this requirement, the applicant is proposing to submit a perimeter fencing plan, a detailed
landscape plan for Locust Grove Road and a "typical" landscape plan for common areas prior to
signature of the final plat by the City of Meridian,
1,13 Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review
process. Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian
for the clubhouse portion of the development. In addition to these assessments, water "Late Comers"
fees may and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged against this parceL as deemed
appropriate. to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water and sewer mains to their
current points. Similarly, the applicant will be entitled to receive payment of "Late Comers" fees by
parties that benefit from public services extended to and from the Woodbridge property, The City of
Meridian shall furni. documeJ:ltatioll to the applicant on the methodolo~v for calculating
"Assessmellts" and "Late Comers" fees, Latecomer fees shall be determined at a later time, they are
und;r ~eview and an agreement will be reached prior to Coancil appnwal sig;nature of the fmal plat
map by the City of Meridian,
Narrative:
The applicant recognizes the fact that assessment and Late-comers fees will be charged at various
points of the development process, During the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, the
applicant requested information as to the methodology behind calculating such assessments andfees,
The applicant also requested that a statement be included in the "Staff comments" that recognized the
fact that the applicant could also apply for and receive Late-comers fees for public improvements,
installed to andfrom the Woodbridge community, as it was not specifically addressed or implied by the
original "Staff comment, " GEl does not feel that these comments are sufficiently addressed in the
recommendation to City Council and would request that the Council consider the applicant's proposed
modification.
It is the applicant's understanding that a consultant is currently working towards the calculation of a
Late-comers fee. GEl would continue to request the opportunity to review the methodology for
~OI"" ~
calculating the fee in order to ensure a fair and equitable approach has been taken, Discussions with
Staff indicate that the proposed modification including the applicant's review of the methodology is
agreeable,
1.14 Applicant has not indicated whether the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to
be owned and maintained by the homeowners association or the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
If the system is being a proposed as a private system (H.O,A.), plans and specifications for the
irrigation system shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan
review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual must be submitted
prior to plan approval. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by
a year-round source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the
culinary water system shall be required, If a single-point connection is utUized, the developer shall be
responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by
the Meridian City Engineer. If City water is proposed as a secondary source, developer shall be
responsible to pay reasonable water assessments for the entire common open area, Staff shall work
with the applicant to determine a fair and appropriate formula for calculating the common area
irrigation assessment
Narrative:
In general, the applicant understands the intent of this condition, but does not necessarily agree with
the methodology for calculating assessment fees, The applicant raised a question as to this
methodology for calculating the Irrigation Water Assessment fee as communicated by Public Works
Staff in the 2-8-00 public hearing. Subsequent discussions with the City Engineer revealed that he is
willing to discuss the calculation methodology with the applicant in order to substantiate the fee, OEI
would request that the proposed modification be accepted to reflect this agreement,
1,18 The conditional use permit approved for this project includes a multiple use pathway along Five
Mile Creek, This pathway is proposed to be public at such time as adjacent properties are developed,
extending the pathway, John Anderson ofNampa Meridian Irrigation District is of the opinion that the
City of Meridian must enter into a license agreement for the pathv/ay and stated it is their policy to not
enter iflto agreements with private developers (even though they have done so on numerous occasions),
It does not seem logical that the City would enter into a license agreement for a pathway which they do
not o'.vn or have an interest ifl, which they are not constructing, and for '.vhich they \yillllflder such a
sceaerie Elflpears ludicrous. Staff request iflput from legal counsel regarding this matter. The City of
Meridian shall work with the applicant to secure a license agreement with the Nampa-Meridian
Irril!ation District for a pathwav alonv: Five Mile Creek. Ifreauired bv the Nampa-Meridian Irri~tion
District. the applicant shall be required to provide liability insurance for the pathwav until such time it
beco~es a Rart of a lar~~r public pathwav syste~,
Narrative: r
Discussions with the Planning and Zoning Commission at the hearing and with Staff subsequent to the
hearing revealed that qJI parties are in agreement on this condition, Staff has stated in both situations
that the intent of the condition is for the City of Meridian to work with the applicant is sel!uring a
license agreement for a pathway along Five Mile Creek. OEI is concerned that the existing language
puts the burden of securing a license agreement solely on the applicant and that if the City of Meridian
does not participate, a license agreement between a private party and the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation
District may not be accepted by the District,
Again, with the discussion at the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing on this application and a
revie.!i of the transcripts of that hearing, the applicant was under the impression tgat this condition
would be modified prior to being forwarded as a recommendation to the City Council, The applicant
would request that the City Council consider the proposed modification to better reflect the intent of
this condition as stated by Staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission.
~
1:1
~,
City o( Meridian
City Clerk's Office
.-.
~.' I
Phone: (208) 888-4433
Fax: (208) 888-4218
Fax
J:o;.._.",....
From:
Fax:
Date:
.:~:
Phone:
PaQes:
..............................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^/..............
....................
... ............. ...
:::::0isii~~:i_ :.:.:.:.:.: ._._:.:~ ..~ : ..,.:,.:.c.~~~.~:.::;.:.: 4=r:~:t.?~_~~~_~~~:I:~.:::1:::~:tt~~;;::~w~:~i~i\::L:.G.i:<!ijt"w:r.~=:\~:~~~~,~,^~~,T,~,~~:.+~.i.;.u::::::~::::=::,~,~;;~~~~~~~~\\^*~~^T~~J .:.:~{{f;:;.:;:~,.:~.....~.....v....~~:;:
~:.
i;
o URGENT
D FOR REVIEW
o FOR COMMENT
D FOR REPLY
.. .. -_.,..,;.....-, ............... .,..._~ ,.~_.-=.:.: ".^A^A- .........."'~;~ ~...: ...... ~~~..,_:-~_.:..,._._...~
~^. .":,- :.- ~~.. ...............':~ .. ........:T_~:::::::::--=:::s._~=,..,.-:::':':':"""_-.;:..=.-.-.
..~ ~ .~~"':"... /: ~.~...-.'L~
..................._...r..~-, ..
................... .., .
..... .~.~.'.... ..'..1 ...... :..::..~,.:, /....
~,'\-'t;
!/:
City of Meridian
Publ ic Works Dept.
3D ~Cdon~~"" 100
MeriiIan. 1dl:M~~1
Phone: (200) 881-2211
Fax: t
. ,.
0.-
~
Mayor ar\d City ColI'd,
Derick O'Neil - O'Neil ErteflX!Ses, Inc. ''-
Bruce Freddeton JI1A. .~
WocxtxidgeP~~
Bra:! HaM<hO~ - Pkdling~ Zoning 0eI:1
Tan KlI1tz - Meri<lt:Il Parks Dir.
03121100
Requested modificationS to StaIIf ~ dated 2f2J2OCIJ
'10:
From:
CC:
BelaN you wi. find ex~ from ()(I' star recomnendatiOOS as fOll'ld in the "R~ to City
CotJr1clr Case NO. PP-00-0Q3. The applicant has Sl.D'ritted their proposed revisions lJlder the aNa!
of alett~ dated Mc:Id1 3, 2000. The modfied comments beIoN are a result d meetings ard phone
conversationS belween staff am the appIk:aIi. staff has incorponied the ~ proposed
revisions that seem to be appropriate, CIld or modified them to be in line with staffs LIlderstanding. The
COf11lien\s ~ faloN the sane order d I!lV~""- - ring foUnd in the -RecornmencIaIioo to City Council,.
RECOMMENDATION
1.6 Sanitary sewer service to this site will be via the existing trunk main that traverses
through the development. Applicant will be responsible to construct lateral sewer
mains to and through this proposed development, Installation of a sewer line in
Locust Grove will be required so as to provide service to adjacent property
through this development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and
routing with the Public Works Department, Sewer manholes are to be provided to
keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of the roadway centerline.
Applicant will also be required to extend an eight.inch sanitary sewer in a 20-
foot.wide easement somewhere in the vicinity of common let hety:~en Lots 83
and 84, Block 6 to provide sewer access to an isolated portion of the adjacent
Locust View Heights Subdivision. If &e"Ner is te be extended bet\~.'eea Lets 56
= 57, BIoek 3 Ie the OlOistiBg eight iBok _~ it sh&IIlle withia " 20 lOOt
~~ A :n;:um !4 fuot wide, "!l w~ aeoeso re~ ~ he
__ ~ _ ~_ ~ ~~d o".!~- ~ s&Bitary s&\ver mams outsule the pubIie right of
way;- Applicant to include a note on his development plans to retain and protect
the all-weather gravel access to the City of Meridian's Five Mile Creek Sanitary
. page 1
Gl., ~
~
Sewer Trunk Line in accordance with the provisions of the recorded sanitary
sewer easement.
1,7 Water service to this site will be via extensions of the existing main in Locust Grove
Road from it's intersection with OentraJ D,.;.,., or from it's intesection with
Franklin R6t1d. Applicant will be respOnsible to construct the water mains to and
through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing
arll routing with the Public Works DepartInent,
(,)
1,8 Developer sBall indicate any exist~ ditch easements on the prelimirAary plat map.
The boundaries of the Five Mile Creek easement need to be defined. Five Mile Creek
and th8 defm6d HldIand tJtibutory of F~ M,. C~k Il1't! is excluded from tm piping
require~nt. Any deviation from this requirement is subject to obtaining a ~
from the City Council.
1.11 A poimder fencing plan, and detailed landscape plan for Locust G1"OlW Road as wen
as a typical landscape plan for JMdestrUm pathways, wetland areas, stormwater
~n ponds, and street Ia1u/sct1p6 islands alllandooaped arC05, ~l be submitted
for review and approval by staff with th~ fllUll p/JIt PlJJllication. prior to submittal of
the final plat map. ft.. letter of eredit or eash SW"Cty '.viR be required for the
impro~~nts prior to sig1iQ:ture 011 the fifl61l plat, Perimeter fencing shall be installed
prior to olXaining building permits.
1,13 Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building
plan review process, Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment
Agreement with the City of Meridian for the clubhouse portion of the
development, In addition to these assessments, "Lat~ Co~rs" ji!~ for sewer,
and possibly wat~r water and sewer "Late Comers" fees will also be charged
against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water
and sewer mains to their current points. Lateoomer fees shall be determined at a
later time, they are under re't\iew and aweemcnt vlill be reaehed prior to Couneil
appro':al. This applicant may submit a wri~n rNJuest to th~ City Clerk's offic~
for th! City to enter into a Late Comers Agr<<ment for those portions of
SInitary sewer and w~ter mains that they will be-instaUing as part of their
proj~ct that will benefit o'Ih.,. lands.
1,14 Applicant has oot indicated whetm the pressurized irrigation system within this
deveJopment is to be ownOO and maintained by the ltomeowners assoc~n or the
Nampa & Meridian Irriaation District. If the system is being proposed as a private
system (H.O,A.), plans and specifications for tht irrigation system shFllI be reviewed
by t~ Public Works Departnwnt as part of the development plan review process. A
draft copy of-the pressurized irrigatien system O&M manual-must be submitted prior
to plan approval. ~ City of Meridian requires that p~irrigatRm systems be
supplied by a year-round source ofwatet. Ifa creek or well source is oot available, a
single-point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single-PQint
:>
. Page 2
,...,.
'I
co~ion is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of
assessments for ~ common areas prior to sijQatUre on the final plat by tAe Meridian
City Engineer. If City water is proposed as a secorxfary source, devebper shall be
responsible to pay water assessments as determined by the CiJy Engineer for the
entire common open area. Stoff shall work with the applicant to dderlnine the
common ana irrigation asst!SSmmts.
1.18 The conditional use permit approved for this project includes a muhip1e use pathway
along Five Mile Creek. This pathway is proposed to be public at ~h time as adjacent
properties are developed, extending the pathway, Jolm .'\nderson ofNampa Meridian
Inigation Distriet is of the opinion tbRt the City of Meridian must enter into a HeeJMle
. agr~ fur the pathway and Mated it is their polioy to ROt enter into agreeHWBts
with private developers (even though they ha'.<e dolle 00 on nwnerous oeeasions). It
does not seem logieal tbrtlt th3 City would enter into a license asr~ment fur a psthway
'.vhich they do BOt o':m or have an interest in, '.vbieh tkey are not oonstnIeting, fQl fur
whieh they ,..Iill BOt be responsible fur tminteBanoo, For the City to aooept liability
uOOer sueh a seemrio Bppell'S ludicrous, Staff requests input ftom legal ooUllSeI
regarding this matter, The City of Meridian shall work with applicant to secure a
lic8". agtW!mMt with the Nampa and ~ridian Irrigation Disbfct for a pathway
along the Fhw Mile CIWk. Said agree11U!llt shall be lmwf!i!tI O'N~ Entuprises,
Inc. and tlte NtlIIfJa and Meridian Irligation DistricJ. q required by the Nampa
and Mellidian Irrigation District, the applicant shall 1M! required to provide liability
insurance for the pathway until such tinw as it becomes part of a ~er public
pathway systt!lll. q and wlri!'n the pathway is deeded to the CiJy as part of a forgo
public pIlthway system, th. CiJy WfJuJd then assume liability and maintelUlllCe
nsponsibiliti5.
..,
epage3
~
1:0
:.
.'.'
i...~ }
';:":v.,,"_""
'.
::~..~
~:-~..:,:".j
"jol
~l
Phone: (208)888~33
Fax: (208) 888-4218
'.F....
, ,
. ,
, .
. .....
". :.:....__:_J,.
:~'~...'lT:~~".,~~~;'y'-'::;\7::~:~:;~~m '--=rr~~t!;~'f!~~~~~~~~~ \<5~]'~f:~:~::;='"' '~"'~='''~:~:~~r~'.~.~~:~~ '.:~:]!f;~:;~;~rr=~:;~lf~?~~
D URGENT
..~RREVIEW
D FOR COMMENT
FOR REPLY
&.
.;-.,...:.oI+"'~"':'M~~ .,....,-."r'<~ '..~~"~ -:'-'~'" ',"0" ... ~I - :~:::r.---.;-",~~-"-""__....:.'''~~, ,-........." .. .......--.<->"y~~~'..........-~.~-~<. ~~~...'...."~..........:.>.....:---o- ... .......-~~--:-.._=:':':~.' ~ ~.. ....o:..-t,.....~.~ ~ -. '~''''''_'-:''-''''''''''''''':~:-:-__'v ....,~- r.....~ .....w
................................................................................................................................
I:j~'!k:C::':::::::~:~:1:,,::::::~:~:::::~::t~::~::C:x!<ir::i,'::':'~:.:!t'Xj~t::~.'L=j!lr,::::::::'C::::~'::'!l~.3[:~:,:at::,~~~:te.1UG_::;:;e::.,~,~.:ti
....................................................=...=.............=.....
j:i(~._..,~ 161.':. :::1:.1-. "." .;.~ .Till .:~~.ir:::i-j?i~ji:i"jii.:L.~~.iiiA.;-;:~.tR .:.:"(.:::y :~:~.:.:.~:.~.:.i.i:i"L.~{{t ..1jjUi~{lLLC: .. ..~::rf :.,.: :::=:!(.Tc:"i ."~:~IY6:.~..." .~_~n.'.~.;.~L~. .lJk~. .Wi."FM .t:~._~ ,1. . ~,~. ,i:
............................................................................................................ ............................ .... ........ .....................................................
~;X~~..<.it.<"..;,,~x.;::....:,2:.:-:~~:;;.:,:.:~'";.:;h:;.::~:~~~~:.-<;.::jj;;;;;:.-~..:.:~~:.;.:..~.:.-~,~:..;..:..:..;.:...;,:;,;;....:.;:;.Iz.:...';,.;.;,.:,;..;,.;.:,,~: ~~~: ~~:~: :...:..;.;.u:.;~".I'~:';..:..~ '.:::.~,...,,:..:...:..:;..;..:,.~ ..-4W ~~ : ;~:";":";';';';';;A..~:";';";';";.~";':;";":'~:h~;;';'::"'; ~~~~;":";'~:...~L
~;:;~!=~~~,~L:~;~~.~~~[::~~~~~~:::::~~;:,~~~;:-f::;:~~~~:~~~~~:J~e~'7.~~:~~;~:)r~x:::~'~~~.~~~;~~~:~~:,~~~~~:.~:.~~:~.:~
::::::~.=-<~::.~~At~~=~~~;'::;::~~""t~,.~~~~
":':..:~ ::::::..~::::::~J
!~A......=..::::~~:::~~.,;;i:i.:~A"...
:::::......:::::..~
~:'::At _....J":. ...l.:l:tii: ~L~:._lU.!li,". ,.:..J.. j ~!k: :.:1. .:.....:q.':...lm. ].~,LC::. .::._.. ~)~~.:... X...:,.~)i,._.~:::!!:J!J..:.-._,.
. ... :#
. ,..J~_.:~ ~".. ~.:;,
** TX C~IR~oR REPORT **
AS OF
~" :
rg 02 '. 11:01
CITY OF ~RIDI~
PAGE. 01
~
MTE T1l'e TO/FR~
07 03/02 10:58 20m 336 5296
MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD~ STATUS
EC--S 02'55" ~ 023 l1<
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"
:t:
-
~..
:f
Fax
~
To: ~ff @eahA-m..,
-=ax: ~'3b'" 02- Vf ~
.
'PAC>Ae: ? ~ 3'" '24'11
Re: pit... (2e[orvu/Vlt'Yld.tt6'o~~
From:
Date:
'6he( fe?!J
:3/'Z/o rJ
f6
Paaes:
cc:
.
D URGENT
~OR REVIEW
o FOR COMMBIT D FOR REPLY
'.I
iiiB
.
.
NOTICE OF HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN pursuant to the Ordinances of the City of Meridian
and the Laws of the State of Idaho, that the City Council of the City of Meridian will hold
a public hearing at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, at the
hour of 7:30 p.m. on March 7, 2000, for the purpose of reviewing and considering the
application of Woodbridge Community, LLC for a preliminary plat for Woodbridge
Subdivision on 164 lots on 50.9 acres generally located on the east side of South
Locust Grove Road one-quarter mile south of Franklin Road.
A more particular description of the above property is on file in the City Clerk's
y
office at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, and is available for inspection during
regular business hours.
A copy of the application is available upon request. Any and all interested
persons shall be heard at said public hearing and the public is welcome and invited to
submit testimony.
DATED this 11th day of February, 2000
,/8
PUBLISH February 18th and March 3rd, 2000.
\V W I /
~~ . /
" ,-
<21 I /
' N ' 10 iff~ Q; I
~~ &:) -L
I , * --.-' ;"J;~ ~
~OMN?0'\1H (j ~
@ Q.O
~ 6 q- tS/lJ ~
r-- Z ~~ ~
i ::l!: .
i ::::> ~
t- ,.
I :'1&.' :J .-
- <C r')
co
WI :...,
r--=\
0::'.
h," Z
/
i
/
/
,{,
"\
. ,
,
,~
0MI'J~ OHi
\8
N \
T
.
.., i
.1
l
1.J/
t"
o
I
I
~ I ~
~.... --. --. ~--
1 0
;.;
W,
I
I
!
ut.
,'-'
r
/
,
;1.Jt~! .~.. ~
(7. Z
N
/
/
-
.~o
/
,.
./
./
./
/
./
./
./
/
./
,.~ ~
./ \V
./ ~ '
.~
" ~
y .
,
^a~1 l";13'^
,/
~
./
"
./
/'
~II:
./
" ./
V
./
/'
./
./
./
./
.-f'
\
/
./
.'
,/
/
/!<'
7:
./
~
~.~
~
.'
''''
""
I<
r.
~
ii
~
t!
....
-
Q:
'"
II
~
. (J "" 0 <!I _.
-- -.. 'Ii - - -- _ ___
::J .;1 o"4!l L?l
..
:<;
· .0
~
~I'f.'~
:t
~
...
~
ill
ifj ~ J;'P
.
~ ~ ~" .', ",. -: "M--' _~. "_'~-'-- - ~..~~
~
~~ ~~
\li ill1!!
~.s.
~ 13'- -v-:
, . I
Z ~ ..>
\ \ (' ..
::,!,
~~/
....... ..--. .-.... ..... - ..... ~.=
-.. -.......;...... ................-.
't-
.....
~
"
I
(
.~
to.
...
<
I.a
....
c;
...
~
...
<
lI\.
'"
\!)
/ ~
I -:t
'..
" ,.:.-:\ Ii
r~ .
. fu ~ ~
'-0 1,,\'
I", ~
: 'J. !If
I,W---
II~! ~ ....
'{; ......... ...,
I\}I ~
i ~ ~
~
:::/ A V
<X>
'1\
"t-
~
~
.....
-
0::
.
"
......
~ ,
?:. ~ !
......:....-.;.....
'.......,.;
.~.; ; !
.... ~
~. ^ .~.....: -
MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING: Februarv 8. 2000
:..
APPLICANT: WOODBRIDGE COMMUNITY. LLC
ITEM NUMBER: 7
REQUEST:
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR WOODBRIDGE SUBDIVISION-164 LOTS ON 50.9 ACRES
COMMENTS
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING & ZONING DEPT.
SEE STAFF COMMENTS
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
SEE COMMENTS
CITY WASTE WATER DEPT:
:,!,-:
CITY WATER DEPT:
il)::RIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
. ~
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: SEE COMMENTS
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SEE COMMENTS
NAMPA ,MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SEE COMMENTS
.,
."
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
SANITARY SERVICE:
OTHER:
;:'~
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian,
,i.:
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
II'
Mayor
ROBERT D, CORRIE
Council Members
CHARLES ROUNTREE
GLENN BEN1LEY
RON ANDERSON
KEITH BIRD
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-4264
33 EAST IDAHO
IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 888-4433 . Fax (208) 887-4813
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(208) 887-2211
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884'o55lJ
MEMORANDUM:
February 2,2000
To:
Planning & Zoning CommissionlMayor & City Council
~= ~:kl:~ ~~o;ity Engme:fill
,
From:
Re:
Request for Preliminary Plat for WOODBRIDGE SUBDMSION - 164 Lots on 50.9
Acres by Woodbridge Community LLC
We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the
application. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by
motion of the Meridian City Council:
GENERAL COMMENTS
1, Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project,
shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate
irrigation/drairui~e district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said
approval submitted to the Public Works Department.
2, Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed
from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 9-1-4 and 9-4-8, Wells may be used
for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation.
3. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis
by our computer model.
4, Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and
street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform, ,"
5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent,
6.
Ifpossible, respond in writing to the each of the comments contained in this memorand1lffi;,
prior to the scheduled February 8, 2000 hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning
Commission. Submit ten copies of the revised Preliminary Plat Map to the City Clerk's Office
a minimum of one week prior to the hearing by the Meridian City Council.
~
-
!-
1.
sewer
this
designer to
~oles are to
west
sewer in a
access to an
to
will of the mun m
to construct the water IllRIDs to
to sizin,g and
T~
at
at
locations are at street intersectioliB
ponds shown on
as common area
d:raiQage
pooos
usabk: as common area all
thiit water is
groundw}ter
an
to an
6.
to suhmittaLofthe final
to signature on
~
~-oo.oo3
W~.l'I',doo
[I
.
~):-
to
~
are to a
'1.
11.
to a
are set a
1
to
FIiI'-00-003
Wood~.PP,,,,,,
a;
..
.-'
- ,
, I
~
...
4
use structures a
1':
recurrence
I€:
IIBasures,
;."
1
use
"
M-OO-OO3
W~,PP<p:
Mayor
ROBERT D. CORRIE
;":..-:::.0--.:
,^, HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY II;
A Good Place to Live .'.-.'
CITY OF MERIDIAN
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
, Fax 288-250 I
City Members
CHARLES ROUNTREE
GLENN BENTLEY
RON ANDERSON
KEITH BIRD
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
:'08) 888-4433 . Fax (208) 887-4813
City Clerk; Fax (208) 888-4218
PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
(108) 887-2211 ' Fax 887-1297
PLANNING AND ZONING
DEPARTMENT
(208) 884-5533 ' Faz 881...1297
TRANSMITT AL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
'C<
_KENT BROWN, P/Z
_THOMAS BARBEIRO, P/Z
_RICHARD HATCHER, P/Z
_KEITH BORUP, P/Z
_ROBERT CORRIE, MAYOR
_RON ANDERSON, CIC
_CHERIE McCANDLESS, CIC
_KEITH BIRD, CIC
TAMM'f de WEERD, CIC
_\/VATER DEPARTMENT
S.EWER DEPARTMENT
'SANITARY SERVICE
..iiiII'""~""' BUILpINGi?~J:.~NT
_-IIII~..
~ ICE DEPARTMENT
_CITY ATTORNEY
,p _CITY ENGINEER
_CITY PLANNER
:.;,;
j,
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE(PRELlM & FINAL PLAT)
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
ADA PLANNING ASSOCIATION
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT
SETTLERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT
IDAHO POWER CO.(PRElIM & FINAL PLAT)
U,S, WEST(PRElIM & FINAL PLAT)
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS(PRELlM & FINAL PLAT)
BUREAU OF RECLAMA TION(PRElIM & FINAL)
YOUR CONCISE REMARKS:
/-/ ~~OO
c~ l.J O#J.t<.. W ~j ::riV AND oJ..
~O p".r-K;j ",. t/.I4..;c.1.oI~ .7;4;LlIrr ~ Lt.. 0';
_., I
K.R. '/(OAIJ5'-to pl'tJ. "'-ofs. Ab<-c..Om~n)
Lo1s N~~_ 40 73Jt. K..o..p1 C-L.J;.:R.c>-.t1f.ptf>~ ,.,
,.- '9- ~w~cO s. ROIf:,S) Ii IV~ Si,.dJl. Aht 1I'l'1€ 'S"l<jiJiS
~' u......~1V~~ fo '8.1< :;:rds-(~L~fY ?JL!Ol-4:.
~dJ).;-'1 'S sf",.. -f~c9, ALL C-ooeS
I{~ J)I"".J~~ IIIVD w4-f..,,... ~7p/7 s ~:i-L
!J JL,JLJ) Fo 13 ~ t'Y\ &-. ;
iII\!I!",
,.: .
SUBDIVISION EVALUATION SflEET
Proposed Development Name Woodbridae Phase 1
File # PP-00-003
>>:.:,.; :i:::::
Date Reviewed 1/24/00
Preliminary Stage XX
Final
Engineer/Developer Toothman-Orton
The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET
NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in
accordance with the Boise City Street Name Ordinance.
The followina streets are existina and the names shall appear on the plat:
.S. LOCUST GROVE ROAD"" and "5. W~A THERBY DRIVE"
The followina street names are denied as duplications:
"WOODBRIDGE!r^' "WARREN" and "POST".
As policy. streets that alian are given the same name. even thouah thev are not connected.
Also. streets that chanae direction for 150 feet or more are given a new name. With that in mind.
the followina street names shall be placed on the reserved list for this development. vet the
locations and/or directionals are NOT approved:
"BOLLMAN" ~BEAM!! '''BALTIMORE'' "PEGRAM" and "PRATT"
r'
The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency
representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must
be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be officially
approved.
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE AGENCY R
Ada County Engineer John Priester Date 1/'.2-7 / /PI)
f ,
Community Planning Assoc, Sue Hansen Date l / d 4,/0 f')
City of Meridian Cheryl Sable Date /, l7~dV
Meridian Fire District Representative Date /- 3/-00
NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the
time of signing the "final plat" I otherwise the plat will not be signed rm
Sub Index Street Index 3N 1 E 17 Section
NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS ~A<hl s~~) U 7 ;'1!:6,,1: 7
TR\SUBS\SM_CITY,FRM '... L?// ' / ,A''-~
..'/' 2-7( "'0' -.
(I.. CENTRAL CEN
rftirHEAlTH
DEPARTMENT
."h_V,
AL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPAR
Environmental Health Division
ENT
Return to:
D Boise
DEagle
D Garden City
i!I Meridian
d Kuna
DACZ
Rezon e #
Conditional Use #,' .... ~-,-__
~mina0inal 7Sh~r~p'i;~-"';"'
After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted. we can approve this proposal for:
~:~nt~aISeWage D community sew;ge system D community water well
,,~e:..:.~ ~ :.1r.~;:te,
TD~~~~n_'WfinE~e~a~(s) musltQbe sl~bmitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare.
'V'S'9~j; nVlronmenta ua Ity:
~, " entral sewa~e ," !;L community sewage system D community water
D" sewage dry lines ~'(entral water
ili;0 ~IO:<: <tR~~f,tt6~createa'mos"qu'itobre~ihfpr.91J1lm1. .,., -- ,,,j)4 .. ..
o II. ThisDH1erit would r~commend deferril.l un~ibhigh'seasollakground water can be determined if other
consid~!~t:iOIlS indicate approval. ..
,.
o I.
o 2.
o 3,
o 4.
o 5.
o 6.
o 7.
fra
/9.
o 12.
o 13.
~ 14.
-
::,?5?';h~~~~-~~~~:; ~.~'~".-\~;,-~-~----. . .. .
. ~o III
We have No Objections to this Proposal.
We recommend Denial of this Proposal.
,,', ~pecifjc ~n~~ge~~o th~"e~act type o!,iF must,,~~ PIi~i~ed~fol'e v:e can c~mlTl1J1t"e,~ this P~oposal.
We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment.
Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal. we will require more data concerning the depth of:
D high seasonal ground water D waste flow characteristics
Oor bedrock from original grade D other
This 9,ffice will require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or
surface waters.
This projWl, b~I~~II~e:reviewe~, by theldahe Dep~rtrTlent of Water Resources concerning well construc~ion and
wateraV,IJ a Ilty.
:::::1
If restroom facilities are to be installed. then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage
"
Regu~ations.
,..; --
We will r,equire,plans be submittedJor a plan review for any:
o food es~blishlllent D, swimming pools or spas
D beverag~establishment D grocery store
D child care center
.. ..
.. ..
,s:-~ #~~p-o,eMW~-X
~g-c..o ~11.-1ti!"/Uel4-h'tt!J~-i
~~~5".;r/)-Date: -L-/-.LL/~
Reviewed By: ~~~
cntD II/,fl ilr
~f~~~6~I~
.
.'1 '1'1 C--'C' ,M' \J .' _.~~ G"I "rl'- "".,t..., .,...~ .~("'\\ .-- ',:<., -
:~~ ,... I }-.-~':. ~I I ~ ."'I(;\'l~ill\..,t'I : _ . :~::.:.~ :qt3,:"- o,)Jy . \~"'11 ..;. .:.-=~) . ~.:oX l'!:l..!~~C
fv :}re,.(tI( el/ll/ (rerJ.t Ji:;<r.J.Se rJ.ffll diJ:r.J.iJcii.~/: (V ?rIJl/lIJ(~ It<a~':h:, lij'<sryl<s: L1.llJ Iv pro(.:.:: elllJ pramvte IIt< h<u[(I, allJ .;ru:lit? <J/ <Jllr (rIV~"'"ell.
. '.
.1
\~
STOAAnY~ TER iY{AJ.'fAGEjyfENT RECOLVf~fENDA TrONS
I:
'Ol
\Ve recommend 1J.1ac scormt;;/acer 6e precreaced chrough a grassy s..\.vale prLor co
discharge to me st!bsufface co prevenc impacc co groundl,v:,acer an~d surface water
qualicy. The engineers and archicecrs involved I,;}ich the design of this projecc
should obtain current best manage[I1enc practices-for storm water disposal and
des ign a stormwacer managemenc syscem thac is preventing groundwater and
surface wacer degradation. ivfarfuals mat could be used for guidance are:
...
".
!!!
!-::,
1;'
I)
State Of Idaho Catalog Of Stormwater Best iYfanagement Practices For
Idaho Ciries 11\nd Counties. Prepared by me Idaho Division Of-:
EtJvironmental Quality J July 1997.
u. .:
;~
,.
~
'.
'"
~i.
t;;
2)
S cormwater Best Nfanagement Practices Guidebook. Prepared by City Of
Boise Public vVorks Department, January 1997. '<Q
~
l'i
','
~
=
~
(t
;~
. :;:
.
,,-
.
:t;
;;
ScormW:lcer
j/98:dly
'Ii
no....'
I,.I~
!Ii
-
.
!~ 7 ..
.
.....,
I 'Il
.
.
s
~,
S'I
--
;t:
.
....
".
A
-.
. ri-'~
-..
,..
.
- .
.
~
.
oS:
{~
lJ!:
~
.
.1
r
~
~
.
~
~
Ie"':
A<:C; 3ois. County Ottic:~'1
i~i:'l. ~(~~~~~':I. x
aCt!" iGl ~~ i.:4
~!"1_': l-t-!o:n: J27.j,,:<t;Q
~.,.,..; ~.r.:,,~: l2i . nICe
.. 1~'.JI1""::ICr.!; ~;:7.i.ec
I~":cI 1'~In:,.n: J:!7.71oW-J
'Me lZ7.7':'~~
~,J.^ l!! .~::!':
.
Sfr'ling valltv, Elmore, Boi$!, and Ada Counties
'! A<:c.wrc Scr9llil~Oltlcfl ".. 9mcI..Ccunrf Ol:t~
i ~c I1cc:!f':1 ':20 :. ~m i:i"~~i I'~. 1A.
:61s" ;0 ~~i'=: MC~N~n ;.;:~:,~::O~~;,:<11
;:~_ JJ':.J~:.: ," E/'I~c. ,I':'W:t::': ;o~ ':,7~~
.:,:.;<. JJol.J~.:.:Z? F--J.".t/,.~"" .d,..:o:G,
',d;.;;..:~ ',0;;
F;l;(; ':4'.J~2! .':
m
IC
~
~
"d~y Counr; elflet
;CJ N. I;: 3.':991
;Mj. :cx 1.:..:3
1\tICC':U: to. 3Je.::a .
;:I!I. ;,j4.il<:4
':~/~':.2Iiol
.
.
!If
@
~
-
:~i
~
:1
".
:-:1
~
i'I
"
Cc: :: fn:~ - Shop .~
F.ile - (!)ffice
:1 ~,<'" :,,;~fJ~~~~~~~~:;~ "
':;;;;;:'-"'1';' WOpCIoridge Community;"L
;,j;;i~f:";? ,- ",', ;.'~t.i7;c~'{ ;5r{~,,4~~I'J~~5; .
:)Ir"~ :x;
-
.~ ~~.....::"".' .
.'"
:\. .
:j ,.
~l:I.'.
~&~1~Z;~
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
Oerk
i.ng & Zoning Commission
phones: Area Code 208
OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861
SHOP: Nampa 466-0663
inary Plat for W~bridae
" District's Fivemile Drain courses through the eastern portion of
,',', n easement to operate and maintain this facility. See Idaho
SUBJECT TO ADVERSE POSSESSION. No encroachments
proval. The developer must contact John p, Anderson or
",way width.
requires a Land Use Change/Site Development
g. Please contact Donna Moore at 466-7861 for
, s must be protected. All municipal surface
, drainage leaves the site, the Nampa &
,So ,
is recommended that irrigation water
, iclian Irrigation District,
'ift
:::.:.
'F
"
.~.~
~ '
, ,..~.~..
.. ."" ....~ .:~. ~, :~c
APPROXIMATE IRRIGABlE ACRES
RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000
BOISE PROJEG RIGHTS - 40,000
~;
lI'
-
11-
t'I
~&~~t)~'
".
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
FAX # 208-463-0092
27 January 2000
Attn: Barry Semple
Toothman-Orton Engineers
9777 Chinden Boulevard
Boise,ID 83714-2008
phones: Area Code 208 I
OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861
SHOP: Nampa 466-0663
RE: Lan~ Use Change Application - Proposed Woodbridge Subdivision ,)
PfJ-OO-oo3 '"
Dear Mr. Semple:
Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the
Irrigation District for its review on the above-referenced development. If this
development is under a "rush" to be finalized, I would recommend that you submit a
cashier's check, money order or cash as payment of the fees in order to speed the
process up. If you submit a company or personal check, it must clear the bank before
IC proc~ssing the application. ·
.
Shoul~ this development be planning a pressure urban irrigation system that will be
owneq; operated and maintained by the Irrigation District, I strongly urge you to
coordinate with John P. Anderson, Water Superintendent for the Irri.gation District,
concerning the installation of the pressure system. Enclosed is a questionnaire that you
must fill out and return in order to initiate the process of contractual agreements between
the owner or developer" and the Irrigation District for the ownership, operation and
maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation system.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to call on me at the
District's office, or John P. Anderson, at the pistrict's.shop. ~.
<
Sincerely,
JfJ~ ~, VYJrr!U-
Donna N. Moore,
Assistant Secretaryffreasurer
il\
cc: File
Water Superintendent
Woodbridge Community L.L.C.
City of Meridian
enc.
..
JJ.
('
.~
'r"
.'
"...,
....::...........
February 8, 2000
City of Meridian
Planning & Zoning Commission
200 East Carlton
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Re:
Woodbridge Community, LLC
Response to Preliminary Plat Staff Report
ij;:.
Dear Commissioners:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments regarding the Phase 1 Preliminary Plat Staff Report
for Woodbridge as part ofthe hearing on February 8th.
As we have been unable to meet with Staff to fully understand the rationale behind some of the
comments, it would take a very lengthy letter at this point in time to go through the suspected rationale-'
by Staff and our response to each of the comments and the rationale for agreeing or disagreeing with
them.
4L To the extent these are comments by Staff which suggest they are identifying areas of concern which
need to be worked out between Woodbridge and the City, we agree that these are reasonable issues to be
ilil
resolved. It is our hope that the Commission recommends the approval of the preliminary plat subject to
" Woodbridge and Staff thoroughly reviewing and discussing all of the comments with the intent of Staff
submitting~suggested specific conditions of approval for the Council's consideration prior to the City
Council hearing scheduled for March 7th. ..
If, on the other hand, it is the Plannillg & Zoning Commission's intent to incorporate these comments as
Planning & Zoning Commission's specific conditions of approval for the preliminary plat, we would
request the Commission consider tabling action for two weeks to allow discussion with Staff and
submission by them of a set of specific conditions of approval for hearing at that time.
We have recently submitted to Shari Stiles and Gary Smith revised conditions of approval for their
consideration.
Again, it is our firm belief that given som.~ good faith work sessions, all of these issues can be
satisfactorily worked through.
-
~:.
Peter S. O'Neill
Chairman
PON/ja
cc: Shari Stiles, Administrator
Gary Smith, Director of Public Works
. ....................................................................................................................-..........-........-----....-(-- i'W; .........:.,...-- .;.-.... .. ..',.:_-
100 North 9th Street, Suite 300 . Boise, Ida~0..{l3702 . (208) 336-3430 . fax:(208) 336-5296
:. ...<:,,"",:,:~~:_..._. ~~. ..:"~--::~,,:. y ~~~.......':;:.~., ..~..................",,".~...., ~.;_(:.....,_"..~.. ........ .. . >__ ....__......l....-::._,.__.......,~.........._..~~..... ............. ... ..1::
{..'......
. .>.....
[."....
.. . ./.
~\ :~:'"
NTEl~PRISES:INc,
. ......._~...., L.u...~" _,,^. L.......~_..._._.L.
February 8, 2000
~,
City of Meridian
Planning and Zoning Department
Public Works Department
200 East Carlton
Meridian, Idaho 83642
Dear Shari Stiles and Gary Smith,
I~.._~:
~~''';
Please fInd below revised "Site SpecifIc" conditions of approval along with a brief narrative explaining O'Neill
Enterprises, Inc,'s rationale behind the modifIcations. These revisions are intended to initiate a dialogue between the
City of Meridian and OEI, not identify the exact wording that we fInd acceptable.
Site SpecifIc Comments: .
1. Sanitary sewer service to this site will be via the existing clunk main that traverses through the
development. Applicant will be responsible to construct lateral sewer mains "to and through" this proposed
development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works
Department. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of the
centerline, Applicant may be required to extend an eight-inch sanitary sewer to an isolated portion of
Locust View Heights Subdivision near the common lot line of Lots 83 & 84, Block 6 if deemed necessary,
If sewer is to be extended between Lots 56 & 57, Block 3 to the existing eight-inch crossing, it shall be
within a 20-foot wide easement. Access to sewer manholes to be coordinated with the Public Works
Department.
NARRATIVE: Applicant should be required to provide sewer service "to and through" the site as
appropriate. Staff comments may be interpreted to require extensions that may not serve the best interests
of the City of Meridian or the developer.
Access to all manholes will be provided. Applicant would suggest working with Staff to determine a
functional, yet aesthetically pleasing method of access for the maintenance of sewer facilities as
appropriate.
2. OK
3. Indicate any existing ditch easement on the preliminary plat map. The boundaries of the Five Mile Creek
easement need to be defmed. (Pending action by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District). Five Mile Creek
and the drain ditch along with associated wetlands west of Five Mile Creek are excluded from the
piping requirement.
NARRATIVE: Waterways through delineated wetlands should be exempt from the piping requirement.
All easements to be identifIed on the fmal plat.
4, Applicant shall coordinate with the Public Works Department to designate the design and locations
for 250-watt and 100-watt, high pressure sodium street lights. All street lights shall be installed at
applicant's expense, Typical locations include, but are not limited to, street intersections and/or fIre
hydrants.
::..-::.......l:~::::::.::::::~ ~...:. :.:.-.:..-...:..'..----=.......~';::::::~:::::-::":=- :>;....- ..:--.::..~L::;.;~~~:~:~:...:.~~.;:~~~....:;(;;: ..~.. ..'.'. .~,:A:-:-.....:.:.. ~,,~. '.'_~_:-'".':.:_~ ..-.-..~.:":",..;,~:'";:i,L. .~;'n... ." :..:.~~,...._._._ .....:.,.._:::.. .":.~.,: ~ .. ..~::-x;;.: .~'
109 N()rth9th ~treet, Suite 300 . Boise, IdahCl 83702. (208) 336-3430 · fax: (208) 336-5296
.-.'<.:....^---==.:.~-:.:...::~~--:=... .... .:"":..:... '~::~=~~~~~.:~~:~~~~;;:~::~:~.;;;~:':~:.::~;.~.:'~-_-'.'.. ,.IIt.::..<;:~:..:.~:::>...:..r:='....,,:;~. '_ b; .:.... ,. _~,:::.:_.::::__:-.-.:.j:. _..~...,. ....- _...:. :. .~:...;.~";: ..:>~,. ......... :.~.....:.:.::::':"ilii .....::......'
rl
~
C-
~
~. II. :."'I
NARRATIVE: Applicant would like to participate in the process of identifying type and location of
streetlights in order to ensure design continuity throughout the community.
ill"" Detention ponds shall be designed such that accumulated water is disposed of per the requirements of the
City of Meridian and the Ada County Highway District.
NARRATIVE: The open space areas within Woodbridge, approximately 20% of the site, serve a variety
of purposes including active and passive uses, The common areas designated for storm water retention in
Phase I also act as visual and physical buffers between neighborhoods, It has been the intention of the
developer to use these spaces for storm water detention from the beginning of the entitlement process, Staff
was made aware of this intention in numerous meetings and specifically on a tour of past projects in which
the applicant identified examples of their preferred method for accommodating storm water,
Detention ponds shall be constructed and maintained per the requirements of the governing agencies.
Iii A fencing plan and detailed landscape plan for Locust Grove Road shall be submitted for review and
approval by Staff prior to approval of the final plat by the Meridian City Council. Perimeter fencing
and Locust Grove Landscaping shall be installed prior to obtaining occupancy permits,
NARRATIVE: A fencing detail and plan is in the process of being prepared and will be submitted for
review and approval upon completion. A detailed landscaping plan will be prepared for Locust Grove Road
per the requirement of the conditional use permit (CUP). A comprehensive landscape plan was not a
condition of the CUP approval and should not be added to the requirements at this juncture. The Meridian
City Code requires that financial guarantees be provided for public improvements but contains no
requirement for private improvements. In our experience, the conditional use permit is typically used as the
mechanism to guarantee private improvements.
i1Jj Per section 9-606 of the Subdivision and Development Ordinance, a letter of credit or cash will be
required for installation of all public improvements, as defined by 9-606 B., prior to signature on the final
plat.
NARRATIVE: The Meridian City Code requires that financial guarantees be provided for public
improvements but contains no requirement for private improvements. In our experience, the conditional use
permit is typically used as the mechanism to guarantee private improvements,
& OK
Ii
Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process.
Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian for the
clubhouse portion of the development. In addition to these assessments, water and sewer "Late-Comers"
fees, as d~wrmined by the formula agreed to by the City of Meridian and the applicant, will also be
charged against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water and sewer
mains to their current points. At the same time, the applicant will be entitled to payment of "Late-
Comers" fees by parties that utilize public services extended to and from the Woodbridge property.
,-".,
NARRATIVE: To date, Staff has not provided an estimate or formula for calculating "late-comers" fees.
The applicant is interested in ensuring that the fees are calculated by a reasonable formula that will apply to
Woodbridge as well as to future development that utilizes the extensions provided by the developer of
Woodbridge.
II
:1
If owned and operated by the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, the pressurized irrigation system shall be
designed and constructed to the standards of the district. If the system is being proposed as a private system
(H.O.A,), plans and specifications for the irrigation system shall be reviewed by the Public Works
Department as part of the development plan review process. For a private system, a draft copy of the
pressurized irrigation system O&M manual must be submitted prior to plan approval
','
v
..
lIP
."
-....
As required by the City of Meridian (section/code?), the pressurized irrigation system will be connected to
a year around source of water. If a creek or well source is not available, a single-point connection to the
culinary water system shall be required. When utilizing a single point connection, fees will be assessed
to the H.O.A. for irrigation of the common areas based on usage and the billing practices of the City
of Meridian.
NARRATIVE: The applicant understands and agrees to the conditions applied to systems owned and
operated by the irrigation district versus a homeowners association. The applicant also concurs with the
requirement for a secondary source of water for the pressurized irrigation system although we do not
understand the need for a year around source of water. Furthermore, the applicant does not completely
understand the requirement to pay an assessment on a secondary source of irrigation water that mayor may
not be used and would request further clarification of this requirement by Staff,
ii'"
iX't OK
12, OK
13. OK
14, The conditional use permit approved for this project includes a multiple use pathway along Five-Mile
Creek. The pathway is proposed to be public at such time as adjacent properties are developed/extending
the pathway. The""~pplica":t",,and thtppty sJlll wH~ ",tth""t~e NampaMeridian"Irrig~tionDistfict in
.2f~g ~""~C~f.d:~::~!~i~:taji~{:.~;~~i~t::c~~r O:%~:;';:O~;;::iii~:: the
assup()nsibUity for the plthway. mm " myf
,',' ,',', thJt~th~"btyJf ,',' " Ijf~~:_l1ihliJte
r eensf~:it:' " ~a eJ~n~'~~i~~'\hMi~~i~r ' 'a~;l~a~~~lb:ir~::~~~Vidm~:
"" )iii.~jlityin,~JrtMM:J,Ce: through the homeowner's associationpfor the pathway until it Clin bea~~ume'rby the
CitY o~~~~(li~. "" "
15. OK
M
Thank y()uJortakingp1:h~e to revie
the conditio'Ws" 'va.!. "
........ ................
e sug!?;cstions,we look forward to v.i3rking withyou fum~r to fm,alize
SIT
,/B
,,2
""SIT",
/L
',', SIT
/L
cc:
Deric]( O'Neill
Pe .11
E
B
Mm
/L
/L
SIT
("
:,,;;
HP LaserJet 3100
Printer/Fax/CopierlScanner
ND CONFIRMATION REPORT for
City of Meridian
2088886854
Feb-2-00 2:13PM
Job Start Time Usage Phone Number or ID Type Pages Mode Status
255 21 2 2: 1 OPM 2'24" 208 336 5296 Send,............, 51 5 EC144 Complet ed,.."...,.",..,..""......""""""
Total
2'24"
Pages Sent: 5
Pages Printed: 0
:~-';:lll1
""!,1"n",~,,l
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Planning 8. Zoning
"'
J'
!f.;.f~~~-'Sq,
0....., tl-- 0__ 0___ o_~
~...
-
"{
~)i
! "
>~
..
~~::
~ ~_io}1
:.;,~
,~
....: