Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 03-20CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, March 20, 200'1, at 5;30 p.m. City Council Chambers 1. Roll -call Attendance: X Tammy de Weerd X Ron Anderson Q Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Approve 3, Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of February 5, 2001, City Council Meeting: Approve B. Approve minutes of February 13, 2001 r City Council Special Meeting: Approve C. Approve minutes of February 13, 2001, City Council Workshop: Approve D. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 00-057 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct a new office 1 warehouse building in a flood plain for Sig D Builders in an I -L zone --r King Street and Baltic Place: Approve E. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: Az 00- 022 Request for annexation and zoning of 118.4 acres to R-4 for proposed Springdale Subdivision by Gemstar Properties, LLC east of McDermott between Cherry Lane and Ustick Road: Approve F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PP 00- 022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 385 building lots and S other lots on 118.4 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Springdale subdivision by Gemstar Properties, LLC — east of McDermott between Cherry Lane and Ustick Road: Approve G. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval; AP 01 ,,001 Appeal of the Planning and Zoning Director's interpretation of the definition of "flashing sign' for A to Z Rental & Supply — 1 503 East 1 s Street: Approve H. Development Agreement: AZ 00-012 Request for annexation and zoning by opal Farrington of 4.70 acres from R-1 to R-4 for proposed addition of a home northwest corner of East Pine Avenue and Adkins Way: Approve 1. Development Agreement: AZ 00-.010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber View Subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: Move to Item 54 J. New Beer and Wine License: Smokey Mountain Pizza and Pasta -- 114 East Idaho Avenue: Approve upon Police chief Approval 4. Department Reports: A. Mayor's Department — Mayor Robert Corrie: 1. Refund of Transfer of Conditional Use Permit Fees for Julie Huerta, All About Kids Daycare: Approve Refund of $213.25 B. Public Works Department -- Director Cary Smith: 1. Will -serve letter relating to land owned by W.H. Moore at Ustick and Eagle Roads: No Letter 2. Easements — Sridgetower Subdivision: Approve 3. Nahas -- Central Valley Corporate Park — Landscape Irrigation: Approve Refund of $5,500 4. Well No. 22 Test Well Drilling: Approve contract for Stevens and Sons 5. Well No. 22 Pumping Facilities Agreement for Professional Services: Approve contract to civil Survey consultants 5. contract Award for WWTP Standby Generator Procurement: Approve contract to EC Power systems 7. Digester & Clarifier Facilities Project Agreement for Completion: Approve 5. (Items moved from Consent Agenda) 1. Development Agreement: AZ 00-010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber View subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: Approve with 'I't Addendum G. ordinance No. 01-913: AZ 00-012 Request for annexation and zoning by opal Farrington of 4.70 acres from R-1 to R-4 for proposed addition of a home — northwest corner of East Pine Avenue and Adkins Way: Approve 7. ordinance No. 01-914: AZ 00w010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber view subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: Approve 8. Tabled from February 20, 2001: FP 01-002 Final Plat approval of 82 + 2 existing single-family dwelling lots and 8 other lots on 43.33 acres for Observation Pointe subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: Table until April 3, 2001 9. continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2001: AZ 00-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres from Ada County RT zone to R-8 for a proposed planned development for proposed Kodiak Development by Hubble Engineering — west of Meridian Road one-half mile south of overland Road: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and conclusions of Law for Approval 10. continued Public Hearing from March 5, 2001: VAR 00-019 Request for a variance to exceed maximum building height of 35 feet and reduce the 30 -foot setback requirement to 20 feet along the 83 feet of the one- story section of the building for proposed Ameritel Inn by B & A Development -- Eagle Road north of 1-84: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and conclusions of Law for Denial 11, Public Hearing: CUP 00-053 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a three-story, 87-roorn hotel in an L -O zone for proposed Ameritel Inn by B & A Development - Eagle Road and 1-84: Attorney to Prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial 12. Public Hearing: AZ -00-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 79.72 acres to R-8 for proposed Sundance Subdivision by G.L Voigt Development -- northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads: Continue to April 3, 2801 13. Public Hearing: PP -00-020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 214 single-family lots, 4 future office lots and 23 common lots on 59.79 acres for proposed Sundance subdivision by G.L. Voigt Development — northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads: Continue to April 3, 280'1 14. Public Hearing: AZ 80-027 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.97 acres from RT to R-4 by Hubble Engineering for proposed Inglenook Subdivision -- east side of Locust Grove Road and north of Victory Road: Continue to April 3, 2081 1 a. Public Hearing: PP 00-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 21 building lots and 3 other lots on 5.97 acres in a proposed R-4 zone by Hubble Engineering for proposed Inglenook subdivision — east side of Locust Grove Road and north of Victory Road: continue to April 3, 2841 18. Public Hearing: CUP 01w001 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an office building for O'Neill Homes in an L -O zone by Toothman- Orton Engineering Company 1 Johnson Design — Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road at 385 South Locust Grove Road: continue to April 352001 17. Public Hearing: AZ 01-881 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 78 acres from R-1 to C -C and C -G by Larson Architects for proposed Silverstone corporate center — southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road: Continue to April 3, 2801 18, Public Hearing: PP 01-081 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15 building lots and 1 other lot on 78 acres in proposed C -C and C -G zones for proposed Silverstone corporate center by Larson Architects — southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road: continue to April 312001 19. Public Hearing: CUP 01-002 Request for a conditional Use Permit for a commercial planned unit development and floodway approval in proposed C -C and C -O zones for proposed Silverstone corporate Center by Larson Architects — southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road: continue to April 3, 2001 20. FP 01-803: Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots, 1 other lot, and 1 City lot on 8.94 acres in an R-4 zone for Tumble creek Subdivision No. 8 by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc -- south of Ustick Road, east of Linder Road: Continue to April 17, 2001 21. FP 01m,004: Request for Final Plat approval of 48 building lots and 8 other lots on 10.19 acres in an R-8 zone for Wilkins Ranch village Subdivision by Steiner Development, LLD — east of North Black Cat and south of West Ustick: Continue to April 3, 2001 22. Time Extension: Request for Time Extension for recording and signing of Final Plat of Pintail Pointe subdivision originally approved June 20, 2000 -- south side of Cherry Lane, east of Black Cat Road: Deny Time Extension 23, Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Approve Turnoff Dates 3121101 and 3122101 ( (l PREP CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, March 20, 2001, at 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers I'm Roll -call endance: Tammy de weerd Ron Anderson '0 Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird -K Mayor Robert Corrie 2. Adaption of the Agenda: 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of February 6, 2001, City Council Meeting: . , B. Approve minutes of February 13, 2001, City Council Special Meeting: V -.z C. Approve minutes of February 13, 2001, City Council Workshop: V -4C, D. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 00-057 Request for Conditional Use Permit to construct a new office 1 warehouse building in a flood plain for Big D Builders in an I -L zone - King Street and Baltic Place: E. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: Az 0D- 022 Request for annexation and zoning of 113.4 acres to R-4 for proposed Springdale Subdivision by Gemstar Properties, LLC east of McDermott between Cherry Lane and Ustick Road: VL<.. F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PP 00- 022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 335 building lots and g other lots on 113.4 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Springdale subdivision by Gemstar Properties, LLC - east of McDermott between Cherry Lane and Ustick Road: .�. G. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AP 01-001 Appeal of the Planning and zoning Director's interpretation of the definition of flashing sign" for A to z Rental & Supply 1 603 East 1st Street: a.rre vL - Meridian City Council Agenda — March 20, 2001 Page 1 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 8884433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. 16. Public Hearing: CUP 01-001 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for an office building for O'Neill Homes in an L -O zone by Toothman- Orton Engineering company I Johnson Design -- Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road at 385 South Locust Grove Road: co -?-t, �Cz /o //t, /-0 3' /!:O In 17. Public Hearing: Az 01-001 Request for Annexation and zoning of 78 acres from R-1 to C -C and C -O by Larson Architects for proposed Silverstone Corporate Center — southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road: �7�2 h 18. Public Hearing: PP 01-001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15 building lots and 1 other lot on 78 acres in proposed C -C and C_O zones for proposed Silverstone corporate center by Larson Architects — southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road: P/X- /_0 45,7/�p 19. Public Hearing: CUP 01-002 Request for a conditional Use Permit for a commercial planned unit development and floodway approval in proposed C -C and C -O zones for proposed Silverstone corporate Center by Larson Architects — southeast corner of overland Road and Eagle Road: 20, FP 01-003: Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots, 1 other lot, and 1 City lot on 8.04 acres in an R•-4 zone for Tumble creek Subdivision No. 8 by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc — south of Ustick Road, east of Linder Road: ljp,4 1,7 21. FP 01004: Request for Final Plat approval of 48 building lots and 5 other lots on 10.19 acres in an R-8 zone for Wilkins Ranch Village Subdivision by Steiner Development, LLC — east of North Black Cat and south of West Ustick:*6�& 22. Time Extension: Request for Time Extension for recording and signing of Final Plat of Pintail Pointe Subdivision originally approved June 20, 2000 -- south side of Cherry Lane, east of Black Cat Road: l� 23. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Meridian city Council Agenda - March 20, 2001 Page 4 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the city of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities reWed to documents and/or hearings, please contact the city Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. proposed addition of a home -- northwest corner of East Pine Avenue and Adkins Way: d - v%e,_ R 7. ordinance No.i AZ 00-010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber View Subdivision by Victory 41, LLD — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: 8. Tabled from February 20, 2001: FP 01-002 Final Plat approval of 82 + 2 existing single-family dwelling lots and 5 other lots on 43.33 acres for Observation Pointe subdivision by Victory 41, LLD -- north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: © 9. continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2001: AZ 00-025 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres from Ada County RT zone to R-8 for a proposed planned development for proposed Kodiak Development by Hubble Engineering — west of Meridian Road one-half mile south of overland Road: a717__Ir��Y X1-1` � 0,1,e 10. continued Public Hearing from March 5, 2001: VAR 00-019 Request for a variance to exceed maximum building height of 35 feet and reduce the 30 -foot setback requirement to 20 feet along the 53 feet of the one- story section of the building for proposed Ameritel Inn by B & A Development — Eagle Road north of 1-84■ /11 12 7<0 4K� 11. Public Hearing: CUP 00-053 Request for conditional Use Permit for a three-story, 87 -room hotel in an L -G zone for proposed Ameritel Inn by B & A Development - Eagle Road and 1-84: r ; � ell ( " 4& -?6 12. Public Hearing: AZ -00-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 70.72 acres to R-8 for proposed Sundance subdivision by G. L Voigt Development -- northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads: C0-->'Vftht4e' �v //L 74-0 /5�� 3 A—a n1l /�' 13. Public Hearing: PP -00,020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 214 single -fatally lots, 4 future office lots and 23 common lots on 59.79 acres for proposed Sundance subdivision by G.L. Voigt Development -- northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads: � /qtj��. 14. Public Hearing: AZ 00-027 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.97 acres from RT to R-4 by Hubble Engineering for proposed Inglenook Subdivision — east side of Locust Grove Road and north of Victory Road: tt4 1-c> lf)��e SA -d /01-T /I 15. Public Hearing: PP 00-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 21 building lots and 3 other lots on 5.97 acres in a proposed R-4 zone by Hubble Engineering for proposed Inglenook Subdivision -- east side of Locust Grove Road and north of VictoryRoad: is".e•/%- II Meridian City Council Agenda -- March 20, 2001 , Page 3 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents anNor hearings, pkme contact the City Clerk's Office at 888433 at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting, H. Development Agreement: Az 00-012 Request for annexation and zoning by opal Farrington of 4.70 acres from R-1 to R-4 for proposed addition of a home — northwest corner of East Pine Avenue and Adkins Way: 1. Development Agreement: Az 00--010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber View Subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: j415' . J. New Beer and Wine License: Smokey Mountain Pizza and Pasta 114 East Idaho Avenue: a ,v,o�,�v� 4. Department Reports: A. Mayor's Department — Mayor Robert Corrie: Refund of Transfer of Conditional Use Permit Fees for Julie Huerta, All About Kids Daycare:ve_ Pra; �-rr 4�1 E 2.6 B. Public Works Department — Director Gary Smith: 1. Will -serve letter relating to land owned by W.H. Moore at Ustick and Eagle Roads: 2. Easements -r- Bridgetower Subdivision: al 3. Nahas — Central Valley Corporate Park — Landscape Irrigation:ewl-VvLe - ('� 4. Well No. 22 Test Well Drilling: vie- Z5 �-�- '_S; 1 5. Well No. 22 Pumping Facilities Agreement for Professional Services:� 0. Contract Award for VWVWTP Standby Generator Procurement: ar)91_aV'4e�-� /__0 �C ' 7. Digester & Clarifier Facilities Project Agreement for Completion: a�"V-C_ 5. [items moved from Consent Agenda] • /YP��� G. ordnance No. Az 00-012 Request for annexation and zoning by opal Farrington of 4.70 acres from R-1 to R--4 for Meridian City Council Agenda -- March 24, 2001 Page 2 of 4 All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at at least 48 hours prior to the public meeting. Meridian City Council Meeting Tuesday, March 20 2001 The regularly scheduled city Council meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Mayor Robert D. Corrie on Tuesday, March 20, 2001. Members Present: Robert Corrie, Tammy de Weerd, Ron Anderson, Keith Bird. Members Absent: Cherie McCandless. Others Present: vary Smith, Shari Stiles, Bill Gordon, Bill Nichols, Dave Bowman, will Berg. Item 1. Roll -call Attendance: X Tammy de Weerd X Ron Anderson D Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: Council, you have the agenda in front of you. I will have a motion for the adoption of the agenda. Are there any corrections? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that approve the adoption of the agenda as published. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the adoption of the agenda as noted. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 3. Consent Agenda: A. Approve minutes of February 6, 2001, city council Meeting: B. Approve minutes of February 13, 2001, City council Special Meeting: C. Approve minutes of February 13, 2001, City council Workshop: Meridian city Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 2 D. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: CUP 00-057 Request for conditional Use Permit to construct a new office 1 Warehouse building in a flood plain for Big D Builders in an -L zone — King Street and Baltic Place: E. Findings of Facts and conclusions of Law for Denial: AZ 00- 022 Request for annexation and zoning of 118.4 acres to R-4 for proposed Springdale Subdivision by Gemstar Properties, LLC — east of McDermott between Cherry Lane and Ustick Road: F. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Denial: PP 00- 022 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 385 building lots and 9 other lots on 118.4 acres in a proposed R-4 zone for proposed Springdale Subdivision by Gemstar Properties, LLC --- east of McDermott between cherry Lane and Ustick Road: G. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AP 01-001 Appeal of the Planning and Zoning Director's interpretation of the definition of "flashing sign" for A to Z Rental & Supply -- 1803 East ,est Street: H. Development Agreement: AZ 00-012 Request for annexation and zoning by opal Farrington of 4.70 acres from R-1 to R-4 for proposed addition of a home — northwest corner of East Pine Avenue and Adkins Way: 1. Development Agreement: AZ 00-010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber View Subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: J. New Beer and Wine License: Smokey Mountain Pizza and Pasta — 114 East Idaho Avenue: Corrie: Consent Agenda items A through J; are there any additions or corrections or anything that needs to be pulled off or discussed? Bird: Mr. Mayor, I did not see, and 1 might have missed it in my packet, the Smoky Mountain Pizza and Pasta. Corrie: It is in your stuff tonight. De Weerd: It is in front of you. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 3 Bird: oh, it is in front of me. I am sorry. No more questions. All development agreements signed and everything that are on the consent Agenda? All the Development Agreements have been signed? Corrie: Shari? Bird: Shari? Corrie: All of the agreements have been signed in the Consent Agenda? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Members of council I believe they have been signed; however, I would request that Item I be moved to the regular agenda for discussion. Corrie: It is a Development Agreement for annexation and zoning on the Timber View Subdivision. Stiles: Yes. Corrie: chief, you have signed the beer and wine license on the Smoky Mountain Pizza? Bowman: Mr. Mayor and Members of council, there was a bureaucratic glitch involving that, and thanks to the city clerk I think we were able to approve that tonight pending an investigation which I will take care of first thing in the morning. Smoky Mountain Pizza does have a State beer and wine license and also a County so I do not anticipate any problems, but we received it a little bit late. would recommend we pass that. Corrie: councilmen, is that satisfactory? Bird: Yes. Corrie: Any further corrections, additions, or changes? Mrs. de weerd. De weerd: I move that we approve the consent Agenda with the exception of moving item I to Item 5. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made to approve the Consent Agenda with Item I being moved down to Item 5 in the regular agenda. Any further discussion? Roll -call vote Mr. Clerk. Roll -call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, absent; Bird, aye, Meridian City Council Meeting' March 20, 2001 Page 4 Corrie: All ayes, motion is carried. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 4. Department Reports: A. Mayor's Department — Mayor Robert Corrie: 1. Refund of Transfer of conditional Use Permit Fees for Julie Huerta, All About Kids Daycare: Corrie: is she here this evening? Would you like to explain to the Council or if you want me to I can -- why you are requesting that refund. Huerta: will you do that? Corrie: okay. council in your folder is telling the schedule of fees, changing the expenses and refunds. The fees to be charged for the various procedures stated above are not refundable expect when the petition or application is withdrawn at least one week before the date of its scheduled Public Hearing and then only by order of the city council. This was done as you remember the last week before and request that this refund be made since the original application was withdrawn. The applicant at this point is requesting that that fee be returned to her. city clerk, have you got anything else on that that you want to --? Berg: No. Corrie: okay, what is the amount of that fee? Do you remember? Julie do you remember what that fee was? If you will come up here please. Huerta: $213.26 Anderson: Mr, Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: 1 guess in light of the circumstances then I would make a motion that we refund the money to Julie Huerta in the amount of $213.26. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to refund the $2'13,26 to Julie. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT F Meridian city Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 5 B. Public Works Department— Director Gary Smith: 'i. Will -serve letter relating to land owned by W.H. Moore at Ustick and Eagle Roads: Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor, council, I submitted a letter to you, a memo dated March 19, 2001, concerning my review of the map information which is a concept drawing of the development of the property along with some topographic map information regarding the ability of the city to provide or accept gravity sewer service from this entire 50 -plus -acre parcel, which includes the 12 -plus acres that is being discussed with the City of Boise as far as transfer from their impact area to the City of Meridian impact area. Based on the information that was provided to me, the property will serve by gravity into the sewer line that is being projected by the city of Meridian to be extended up the South Slough. I think that was the question that was asked of Public Works Department at the last council meeting. Corrie: Any questions from council? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I have a question for the attorney: what is the procedure that we go through on this? We are willing to accept those 12 acres, and it will be a real (inaudible) flow to the South Slough. What do we do, pass a motion? This is just something that goes before the commissioners and they reassign the area from Boise to us. We got a letter from Brent Coles, they are agreeable. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I think there are two separate issues here. one is can we serve the property and yes we can, so it is a can serve letter in my opinion. The second issue is one that is supposed to be addressed next week. If we do the exchanges in our area of Impact boundaries, does that constitute a change in Comprehensive Plan or the Land Use Map? So I believe that that is a total separate issue. Anderson: Actually, Mr. Mayor if I could. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: Actually, I think there is a third issue then because I think the applicant was asking if we would be willing to extend our sewer service outside of our city limits. Meridian City Council Meeting: March 20, 2001 Page 6 Corrie: You have three issues here that you are going to have to address. think tonight the will -serve letter that the city Public Works Director has told us that we can service it. Now the question is do you want to service it or will you service it? Plus, will we take the land exchange that the city of Boise wants to give in the area of impact to us, and then also we have a choice about giving them some land that they would like to have in the south part of town to correct an oversight they had there. I guess my question to you Mr. Attorney is do we do anything at this point? Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of council, I think you need to make some sort of decision as to what the next step is at the very minimum. Although there is a letter in your packet from Mayor Coles from Boise city, which is a letter to the Board of Ada County Commissioners asking to start the renegotiation process with regard to these different areas of impact. The state statute says, and this is Idaho code 67-6626 subsection E, says prior to negotiation or renegotiations of areas of city impact plan and ordinance requirements; the governing board shall submit the questions to the Planning and Zoning commission for recommendation. Each commission shall have a reasonable time fixed by the governing board to make its recommendations to the governing board. Then there is another statute, which specifies that; the Planning and Zoning commission can recommend changes to the comprehensive Plan only every 6 months. The draft comprehensive PIan that is close to being presented to the Planning and Zoning commission for its review and so forth, and then they would presumably do their work and then have a plan which they would recommend to this body for adoption. It would seem to me that your choices are you could indicate to the WH -Moore company the circumstances under which you would be willing to serve and that could be contingent upon the actual renegotiations of the area of impact boundaries to include that one 12 acre parcel. It could include any other conditions that you think are appropriate for that extension of services. or you could say you are going to remand it this question to the Planning and Zoning commission for them to review it and indicate what conditions they think would be appropriate in connection with renegotiations of the area of impact boundary. Then I would say that all of this needs to be tied in on the map that is going to be with the comprehensive Plan revision that is going to be recommended to this council. So that you do not get caught in this whip -saw, we have changed the Land Use Map now we cannot do anything on the Comprehensive Plan for every 6 months that you bundle it together so that you do not have that problem. I do not know, Mayor and council members, if I have adequately addressed your question or left it out there. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 7 Anderson: I had a question then. Bill, I guess kind of the way you present that I am confused because I do not know how you can wrap this into the package at this point without messing up the Comprehensive Plan, if that is going to be seen this summer. How can you bring this issue into that without clouding that? Nichols: Mr. Mayor, Councilman Anderson, and members of the Council I cannot recall of the proposed map how this area is zoned now. How it is proposed on the Land Use Map now the area that is already in the area of impact that is owned by Mr. Moore. Assuming that the use is not inconsistent at this point with his proposed plans or even if it is it can still at the Public Hearing stage, wH-Moore or anybody else, can say this area ought to be designated this type of use and by the way, we think this 12 acres over here ought to be in your area of impact. I do not know that it really messes up the plan, but I am not the one that is putting the plan together; Shari is. So I would say that she ought to have some input here. It would seem to me that it is best do them all at once because you have two things; one this 12 -acre parcel then there is another piece south of the freeway next to Boise that they want in their area of impact. I think there is an area of impact line that goes through a rural subdivision there. I think you can do it together. It may be more problematic in the abstract then it is in the actual getting down to it. Corrie: Shari. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council we can revise the proposed new map to include all of these changes as part of the overall plan. Then it will be up to the Planning and Zoning commission to make the recommendation, and we will explain to them what the changes are to the area of impact. we can include those areas. Corrie: So, if I am hearing you right, it is best to reprimand this back to Planning and Zoning then to tie it up into one package. Correct? Stiles: If what I am hearing from Mr. Nichols is that this is going to constitute a change, yes we would like it to be consolidated in with the new plan. Nichols: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council, I need to emphasis too that if any of the council members feel that there needs to be some additional — there needs to be some additional discussion on this particular issue because even if the services are extended and it is outside Boise's area of impact, it is in the county, the city will not receive any impact fees in connect with any development that goes on there. The cities Landscape and subdivision ordinance will not apply. The city will not receive any building permit fees for anything that is done out Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 _. Page 8 there. So, there are some questions as to whether you want to do that. At the same time you recognize that that is a portion of you area of impact that you have wanted to protect as far as be able to bring into the city of Meridian when it is contiguous with the city limits. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: As I recall when this was brought up all that was asked was if we could service it with gravity flow and would we service it when it became contiguous to the city limits. I do not recall anything being said different than that. I thought this was strictly, as I know it affects the comprehensive Pian, which Shari just said. I do not know why you have to tie in three different deals when all they are asking is just a will serve letter to get it changed from Boise to our deal to our impact area. That is what I thought was being asked I could be wrong. It was just a will serve letter, can we and will we when it becomes contiguous to the city. Corrie: I understood the request for the will serve letter to be different. That request was to extend services outside the city limits and even if it was not contiguous, but the applicant is here so maybe they can clarify that. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, I do have the letter in front of us. They are saying that they would like the services brought out to them until and annexation could be begin, and they would like to start construction. So in essence they would be paying all of their fees to the county and Mr. Seel had mentioned to us that in the long run we would recoup those costs back. I would like to say I have been very consistent in my position that we run our services as we annex into our property and that would be my position. Seel: Jonathan Seel, W.H. Moore company. When we initially presented the letter and came in front of the council and the Mayor, our request was that we were asking for your approval to take that land which is currently within the city of Boise and put it into the city of Meridian impact areas. But however tied to that is that we get a will serve letter so that the time the sewer service is available we can connect to it regardless of whether we can be annexed. As 1 said, the last time I stood up here, we do not have a dispute with being annexed. If we could be annexed right now, we would be, but there is no apparent path at this time. Now maybe a year from now there might be, but what we need is that assurance that at the time that sewer is there, we can go ahead and tie to it. We also said that we agree that we would not fight annexation at the time that they become available. And again I think that is in the near future. I think possibly within the next year, but it is critical that we get the will serve letter in addition to the annexation and it not be tied that we would be contiguous to the city. So I do not know if that answers your question or not. The other thing that I responded to is that I think in the short term, yes there is not impacts to you that are not Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 9 favorable, but I think in the long term I think this will be an extremely beneficial project to the city of Meridian, and it is one that we would like to get started on at this point. That is what we are really looking for. We are looking for a way that we can start this entire project and make it work and begin our marketing and our development and our approval process. We believe that within the next year the sewer will be there. And again as councilman Anderson said, he asked if I was looking for a guarantee, and we are not. We understand there is no guarantee that it will be year, but we think within the next year the sewer will be there. That will dovetail very well with our project and be able to move in. But at that point if there is not annexation, we do not want to be held back. De Weerd: I was very clear on your intentions. You are saying you want to go ahead and submit your application through the county? Seel: Yes. De Weerd: They need the letter of our willingness to service that from us in order to approve it. Seel: No, we can do one of it through the city of Boise right now. In other words, we can move forward with the city of Boise and the 12 acres immediately. We have talked to the city to Wayne Gibbs. That is not a problem. We think it is probably in our best interest to try and merge them all together and do this project in one city, instead of having a dividing line down potentially your road this part is in the City of Boise and this part is in the city of Meridian. I think it will be difficult. We can do it, but it would be difficult. So our feeling is more if we can give you the 12 acres, you provide us with the will serve letter, which gives us the insurance that at the time the sewer is there we can tie to it. We would also agree that at the time that we can be annexed into the city, whether that is tomorrow or a year or a year and a half from now, we would not contest that. We would be in complete support of that. We would make that a condition. We would just like to be able to move forward in this project. We just felt this would be a simpler way, we can do it other ways, but we feel this would probably long term be the best way. De Weerd: And Mr. Seel, I would like to see that happen too. However, this Council made a commitment over a year ago that the way we were going to grow and service that development would be that we would grow from the inside out, and the developments that we served would be contiguous and annexed into the city at that time. That would be my concern. I know that your developments are very nice; we would like to see that a part of the Meridian community, but we are not out there yet. I know that that is your concern, but how we set a priority that that is kind of the path of logic that we were going to follow. All I am saying is I would like to remain consistent with that, and yes we will serve you, but we will serve you when you can be annexed into the city. Meridian City Council Meeting i March 20, 2001 Page 10 Seel: Yes, I guess that is our dilemma because we do not have any control. We would love to make that possible tomorrow. Unfortunately, we are not in that position, so I guess our dilemma again, and I am probably repeating this, is we would like to move forward on this project, which we think again will be a real benefit and a plus to the city long term, but we cannot at this point. We do not see any option. There is no immediate path. We wish there were if there was we would do it. I would prefer to do it that way than go through this process. This process so far has been rather convoluted, and we have not accomplished anything, very little at this point. I have only begun this process, but this is the only way we can see it happening at this point. Sure, as you say waiting until the land potentially, somewhere down Eagle Road move over and then we can do that. But we do not know when that is going to be. Until then, it just simply sits there as farmland, and that does not do anybody much good other than farmers maybe. Anderson: Farmland is a good thing. Seel: It is a good thing, but Winston does not purchase land for farming. So that is our dilemma, and that is the reason we have staved this thing, and it is kind of going between a series of different groups. Getting approval here, getting approval there, and getting approval okay everybody is okay then moving to the next step. We started at the City of Boise, they said yes that that seemed fair and reasonable to them. The county said it seems to be fair and that they could work with us. The next process is the city of Meridian thinks that this makes sense, is something they are willing to work with us on? I understand your concern about annexation. I wish we could do something about that, but we cannot. That is why we are kind of asking for some help in enabling us to get going. 1 do not this project — this project would probably take a year before we have the roads and the infrastructure in at best, so I think a lot of it would dovetail. If we wait until we are annexed and then begin it, we are that much further behind. De Weerd: I think that is what every developer who comes in front of us has to deal with. The timing of the issue, and we understand that, but we can only do it in that logical growth pattern. Corrie: Who would sewer our part? Seel: We would connect at this point, if this does not become an option, we would simply go back to the city of Boise and we would connect to their sewer and do that development. Corrie: Just on the 12 acres. Seel: Yes on the 12 acres and we would keep that in the city of Boise then. Sewer and water is available right now. It is zoned where we can do a commercial development within that area, so again from that standpoint, that is f . Meridian city Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 11 an easier way to do it, but we think long term having the whole project within the City of Meridian is more to our benefit and also to your benefit. So short term there may be some impacts that you do not like, such as maybe fees that you are foregoing, but I think long term there is going to be a lot of benefits to it. We are just trying to get that train rolling at this point. And I guess we need some help. Corrie: Who is going to drive the train? You or us? Seel: well, I think it is going to be a combination. I have talked to the county, and the county recognizes that ultimately this package is going to be given to the City of Meridian. Someday, whether that is a month from now, two years from now, it is going to be annexed in the city. Let us say hypothetically that we go ahead and we do a development agreement with the county, if we just hand it to you and it is something you do not like that is not very fair. So they recognize the importance of working with you through the process. We also do too. We are not thinking or suggesting that we are going to go the county, do an application, do this development, and then kind of hand you something whether you like it or not. So there is going to be a great deal of involvement with the city of Meridian. The county, making sure that it is something that you want when it is annexed. So l think there will be I think fortunately or unfortunately there will be more than a few people driving this train. Corrie: It is just a matter of whose timing we are going to use. Yours or ours. You want to do it now. Seel: We would like to begin the process now. Corrie: And we do not want to do it now because we have not got the avenue yet. I see. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would offer my two -sense. I think your proposal has several major points, and I agree with about 75% of those points. I think it makes sense for all of that to be in one city's impact area. I think it makes sense to sewer it all one direction if you can. There is the issue about as the project develops and as plans get reviewed and stuff like that, our staff would have additional time reviewing those plans just like the county, and we would be out those funds that the county would receive. But to me that is really the minor issue. The biggest sticking point for me on this whole project is the precedents that it sets with that will serve letter, and that to me opens up a whole can of worms because we have a whole gaggle of developers that are waiting to develop out there on the outside. And the minute that we do something like this for you, we have set a precedent that is just going to open the flood gates for request after request to do Meridian City council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 12 the same thing for their project. And everybody agrees that we will sign letters, we will annex as soon as we could, all that was said in southwest Boise when Boise extended their sewer lines outside the city limits of Boise too, and now we are seeing the impact of that years later in the arguments that are occurring in the legislature and things like that. So that is my reservation on your proposal. I agree like I said with 75% of it. I agree with Tammy, we think Winston is a very reputable developer. We would love to have his project, but the timing at this point is just not right for us; therefore, I am not going to throw my support to the letter of intent to serve. That is the point that is bothering me. Seel: Well if I understand and might I correct it, I had understood that recently and I may be off on this that this same situation was done for someone else or has been done in other cases, is that an incorrect understanding? Anderson: I do not know that it has. Bird: It has, we took the water out to Summers. We took the water line all the way to Summers Funeral Home out there. Seel: And I know Winston has thrown that at me and said they have done this in other situations too. I am not suggesting and unfortunately I do not have the name of that, but I ask that as a question here. Anderson: That issue is completely different than this. That one was a situation where we already had the county approve a project in our area and there was no way to get the fire protection there, and so that was a project that was approved and we did that just in the interest of getting the fire protection. So it was not a matter of a letter of intent to serve or sewer lines or things like that, so I see this as a complete different set of circumstances to it. So I do not think we have set a precedent with that one. Seel: okay. Anderson: In my mind. Corrie: Any other comments? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Then the question is do we want to have the will serve letter written to W.H. Moore's property on Ustick and Eagle Road? Anderson: Well, I guess the clear direction is I think everybody agrees with all of the points here except for that letter with the will serve, and so if that is the sticking point for you and there are other issues then I guess take the 12 acres to Boise, and we hate to see it leave. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 13 Seel: I do not want to make that sound like a threat or thing because it is not. It is just the situation we are faced with, and that is what I wanted to emphasis last time I was here that to say yes we will take the 12 acres, but without the opportunity to tie in the sewer when it becomes available does not really do us any good. So we need one with the other and without then I guess we pull back and head in another direction, so again that is not meant as a threat. We have to evaluate our options here and that is the only pursuit of options. Corrie: Thank you. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Seel: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you, Jonathon. Cary, item 2. 2. Easements — Bridgetower Subdivision: Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor. The second item is a presentation of an easement document for Bridgetower Subdivision, which is located on the north side of Ustick Road between Ten Mile Road and Linder. These two easements, one is sanitary sewer line; one is for water as the temporary easement at the end of a street that is going to be extended in the future. The sewer line is a connection of the subdivision to the existing sanitary sewer trunk line along the north edge of Five Mile drain. If you have any questions, I can try and answer them. Bird: I have none. De Wveerd: I have none. Anderson: I have none. Corrie: No questions. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I believe he needs a motion to accept that, does he not? Corrie: Yes. Smith: Yes, please. Meridian City Council Meeting { March 20, 2001 Page 14 Bird: With that I would move that we approve the sanitary sewer line and water main easement with Primeland Development company, LLP. De weerd: second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the sanitary sewer line and water main easement. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Members of Council. 3. Nahas — Central Valley corporate Park — Landscape Irrigation: Smith: The next item I have is a request by developers of central Valley Corporate Park, Bob and Ron Nahas, for a refund of water connection fees that they paid for sprinkling of common area, landscaped common areas. This connect fee was paid for a single -point connection for water that would be used after the ditch water was not available from the Eight Mile Lateral. They refer to this as shoulder season water, it is not utilized all summer long, but it is utilized prior to ditch water availability, and it is utilized after ditch water availability. Their intent is to drill a well on site. They have petitioned the Idaho Department Water Resources for this permit for a shoulder season irrigation well. It is my understanding that they are going to receive that drilling permit. In that regard they have requested a refund on the $8,500 that they paid for water assessments. They have been paying their water user fees as the water has been used. The $8,500 would then be used by them to drill and outfit the well, and they would disconnect from the city system for this shoulder season water. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: So clarify for me Gary, when you say the water user fees, we are not refunding the money for water that they have already used at this point are we? Smith: No. The $8,500 is a connection fee that they paid for capacity in the system. It is just like anybody pays that connects to our system. They pay for a capacity requirement for our ability to provide the water and then they pay for the water as a user fee. They have been paying their user fee as water that goes through the meter, is measured through the meter. Anderson: This is kind of off of that subject but is that grass that they have out there on that berm, is that some kind of weird grass? It does not look like normal r Meridian City council Meeting( March 20, 2001 Page 15 grass. with this water that they get help to make that look any better? It looks like clumps of grass that somebody forgot to mow or something. Smith: That is a type of grass that they use low maintenance type of grass — Anderson: It does not take much water? Smith: -- well it is not supposed to, but they may be putting too much on it, too. have not seen anything from Mr. Nahas, either Bob or Ron Nahas concerning this drilling permit or the status of the permit. But if you decide that this refund is appropriate I would think that it should be based on their submittal of documentation from Idaho Department of water Resources that they do have a valid drilling permit for this type of well. Corrie: Any other questions on the request. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve this $8,500 pay back with the condition of the completion of the pump, the well, and everything attached, not showing but upon the completion of this well pump and everything. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to return the $8,500 with the conditions on the motion as stated. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Members of council. 4. Well No. 22 Test well Drilling: Smith: The next item I have is a request for approval to enter into an agreement with Stevens and Sons Well Drilling to drill a test well near the future production well that will be drilled in the Bear creek Subdivision city Park Area off of Stoddard Road, south of overland. Stevens and Sons has completed at least 0 wells for the city during the past 5 or so years that we use to design the production well that would be drilled after that. We are anticipating that the production well for this area for the Bear Creek Subdivision will be drilled during this summer. The proposal from Stevens and Sons is to drill the well on a time and material basis with a not to exceed $24,900. There is also some consideration for this well to drill at such that we can utilize it at a later time for Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 16 irrigation in the park area. Supplement the water that we would be getting from the Irrigation District for that purpose, so we do not have to rely on city water. Public Works recommendation is to award the contract for drilling this Bear Creek test well to Stevens and Sons for time and material not to exceed $24,900 authorized Mayor to sign and city clerk to attest. Corrie: Council, you have heard the request from the Public Works. Any questions? Bird: I have none. De weerd: No. Corrie: okay, I will entertain a motion then on the recommendation — De weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de weerd. De weerd: I move that we approve awarding the contract for drilling the Bear Creek test well to Stevens and Sons well Drilling, Inc., for time and material amount not to exceed $24,900 for the Mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to award the contract to Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, not the exceed $24,900. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Members of council. 5. Well No. 22 Pumping Facilities Agreement for Professional Services: Smith: The next item I have is the proposed engineering agreement for professional services for designing the pump and pump facility for Well No. 22, which would be the production well in the Bear creek Subdivision City Park area. This proposal is presented by civil Survey consultants in Meridian. civil Survey has been doing all of our well pumping facility designs for us. They have done an extremely good job. They are very reliable and very cost effective. The construction of the facilities has always been without any change orders to speak of at all, so they have done a great job for us. Their proposal is to provide the design for the facility at $10,020 and construction services, which is their looking after the construction, at $0,830. Both of those fees are on a time and material Meridian City Council Meeting] March 20, 2001 Page 17 with a not to exceed those numbers. I think you have a copy of the agreement that they are proposing to use, and hopefully Mr. Nichols has had a chance to review that, and it is similar to or exactly the same as the agreements that we have had in the past with Civil Survey consultants. So Public Works recommendation to you is to award the contract for preparation of the design documents for Well No. 22 pumping facilities to civil Survey consultants of Meridian, Idaho in the amount of $16, 020 for design and $5,830 for construction services on a time and material basis with a not to exceed those numbers to authorize the Mayor to sign and the city Clerk to attest. Corrie: council has heard the request from the Public Works Director. Any further discussion? Hearing none, I entertain a motion. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I make a motion that we award the contract for Well No. 22 pumping facilities professional services agreement to Civil Survey Consultants and a not to exceed an amount of $16,020 for design and $5,830 for construction services and authorize the Mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the request on recommendation of the Public Works Direction on the motion. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Members of council. 5. Contract Award for WVIITP Standby Generator Procurement: Smith: The next item I have is an award of contract for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Standby Generator Procurement. This is 40OKW standby generator for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. We received two bids one from EC Power Systems for $51,613.34. The other bid was from Cummings Intermountain at $54,407.85. Bid prices are near estimates and within budget. The generator will be installed as part of a larger upgrade project later this spring that is under design right now by Taylor Engineers. So unless you have any questions of me, I would recommend from the Public Works Department that this contract be awarded to EC Power Systems for the Wastewater Treatment Plant standby generator in the amount of $51,613.34. Corrie: Any discussion? Meridian City Council Meeting ` March 20, 2001 Page 18 Bird: I have none. Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: 1 move that we approve the awarding of the contract with EC Power Systems for the Wastewater Treatment Plant standby generator in the amount of $51,613.34 and authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to award the contract for the standby generator to EC Power Supplies in the amount of $51,613.34. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor. Thank you Council. 7. Digester & Clarifier Facilities Project Agreement for Completion: Smith: The last item I have is kind of a closing agreement for the project that is coming to an end at the Wastewater Treatment Plant for the digester and to clarify our facilities. We have had some issues with the contractor and this sub - agreement to our construction contract agreement clarifies some of the issues that have been at hand. It specifically references change order No. 4, 5, and 6 and it outlines a revised deadline by which all remaining work must be completed and redefines the liquidated damages if the work is not completed by that deadline — *** End of Side one *** Smith. -- the agreement has been reviewed with Mr. Nichols, and I believe that Mr. Nichols is satisfied with it. So your Public Works Department recommends that the agreement be approved to authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest for this agreement of completion with Turn -Key Incorporated for the digester and clarifier facilities project. Corrie: Any discussion, Council? Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Meddian City Council Meeting / March 20, 2001 Page 19 Bird: I have one question. On this $500 date, have we got retainage and stuff that will cover that? Smith: Yes sir. Bird: okay, with that then I make a motion that we authorize the Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the agreement for completion with Turn -Key Incorporated for the digester and clarifier facilities project. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the Turn -Key Incorporated for the digester and clarifier facilities project. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Smith: Thank you very much Mr. Mayor and Members of Council. Item 5. (Items moved from Consent Agenda) I. Development Agreement: AZ 00-010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber View Subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: Corrie: Now we have an item that was taken off of the Consent Agenda which was Item I, and we need to address that at this point. It is the development agreement on the 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 on the proposed Timber View Subdivision north of Valley Road and east of Meridian Road. That was requested by the Planning and Zoning Director so you have the report. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council, the Development Agreement has been signed by the applicant; however, there is one item that has really not been able to be resolved. It would be Item 5.2 on page 5 of the Development Agreement, a condition of the annexation and Preliminary Plat was that there be a landscape buffer along the west side of the development, a planting strip, due to the fact that there is a gravel pit there currently. We had agreed that if they could obtain a letter from the adjacent property owner stating that they were in the process of reclaiming that and the property is likely to be converted to a residential use that we would waive that 20ft landscape buffer requirement. we did receive a letter from Mr. Andy St Claire; however, it was not in keeping with really what we had requested. He is not `milling to sign a letter just stating outright that it will be residential. He wants to keep his options open incase he will attempt to do some kind of commercial development or something else in the future. Do you have the letter from Mr. Mike Caven? I do not have a date on it. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 20 He has come up with a compromise that he would be willing to either include* in his covenants or requirement that the property owners put in two trees along their rear property lines and also to put a 20ft landscape set back on the back of those lots. And if the covenants are not adequate that he would be willing insure himself, insure the Council that he himself will provide for those two trees per lot to be planted in the backyards of all of those lots. I did talk to Mr. St Claire, and he reiterated that he is reluctant to say that he is not going to try something else besides residential. He is in the process of reclaiming in. He said all of the property adjacent to this, it is actually observation Pointe, he is the process of reclaiming that, and they are bringing fill in and the only area that they are currently extracting material from would be along the northern boundary of his property. I do not know quite how to handle this unless Mr. Caven just handed me addendum that was prepared by Mr. Nichols. He is quick, and it has been signed by Mike Caven. And if you feel that is adequate and would like to approve that, we would recommend that you approve the Development Agreement with the addendum. Carrie: okay. Council, do you have anything with that? Bird: I do not have anything. Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Hearing the staff's comments and the first addendum to the Development Agreement, I would move that we approve the Development Agreement request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for the proposed Timber View Subdivision by Victory 41, LLC with the first addendum at 5.2 inserted. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the insertion of the 5.2 in the Development Agreement. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Stiles: Thank you. Corrie: Thank you, Shari. okay before we get started here now, we have 11 Public Hearings in front of us. Whether we are going to get to all of them tonight, do not know. The council has some early morning meetings, and they want to close this off about 10 p.m. So we are not here until midnight, so we will see where we are. We will go down in order, and if you are going to testify be sure you sign on those cards in the back. Has everybody signed that wants to testify? With that being said, when we get to the public hearing I will tell you how we are Meridian City Council Meetingf March 20, 2001 Page 21 going to do it and give some time limits so that we can get through -- maybe we can get through all of them. We will try. Item 6. ordinance No. 01-913: AZ 00-012 Request for annexation and zoning by opal Farrington of 4.70 acres from R-1 to R-4 for proposed addition of a home -- northwest corner of East Pine Avenue and Adkins Way: Corrie: I will have the clerk read that ordinance by title only at this point. Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Members of Council ordinance No. 01-913, an Ordinance finding that certain land owned by opal C. Farrington Trust, which Pies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho. And finding that the owner has made a request for annexation in writing to the Council and said land be annexed to the city of Meridian and zoning designated low density residential district R-4 and declaring that said land by proper legal description as described below be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof in conflict here with, in directing the city Engineer to add said property to official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and directing the Clerk of the city of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada county recorder, auditor, treasurer, and assessor and the state tax commission of the state of Idaho pursuing to Idaho Code section 50-223 and section 53-2215. Corrie: okay, you've heard ordinance No. 01-913 read in its form; would any one here like to have the ordinance read in its entirety? Hearing none, Council I will entertain a motion on the ordinance numbered 01-913. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that approve ordinance No. 01-913 a request for annexation and zoning for opal Farrington of 4.70 acres from R-1 to R-4 for a proposed addition of a home on the northwest corner of East Pine Avenue and Atkins Way with suspension of the rules. Bird: Second. Corrie: okay, ordinance No. 01-913 has been moved and seconded to approve the ordinance by suspension of the rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, a roll call vote Mr. Berg. Roll -call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, absent; Bird, aye. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 22 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 7. ordinance No. 01-914: Az 00-010 Request for annexation and zoning of 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for proposed Timber View Subdivision by Victory 41 , LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: Corrie: If the Clerk would read ordinance No. 01-914 by title only at this point. Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Members of Council Ordinance No. 01-914 an Ordinance finding that certain land to be know as observation Pointe subdivision lies contiguous or adjacent to the city limits of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, and finding that the owner has made a request for annexation in writing to the Council and that said land be annexed to the City of Meridian of zoning designated low density residential district R-4 and declaring that said land by proper legal description as described below be a part of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho repealing all ordinances, resolutions, orders, or parts thereof in conflict here with, and directing the City Engineer to add said property to the official maps of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and directing the Clerk of the City of Meridian to file a certified copy of the ordinance and map of the areas to be annexed with the Ada County recorder, auditor, treasurer, and assessor and the state tax commission of the state of Idaho pursuing to Idaho Code section 50-223 and section 63-2215. Corrie: Further reading of ordinance 01-914 by title only, is there anyone in the audience who would like to have the ordinance read in its entirety? Hearing none, I will entertain a motion on ordinance No. 914. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move that we approve ordinance No. 01-914 request for annexation and zoning for 40.33 acres from RT to R-4 for the proposed Timber View, better known as observation Pointe subdivision by Victory 41, LLC. with suspension of rules, Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the ordinance No. 01-914 by suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 23 Anderson: I just wanted to comment while that Plat is up there on the overhead that I appreciate the developer doing something a little bit unique in Meridian, and that is putting something other than 8,000 square foot lots in. These are nice size lots and has a little less density to it, and I think that this will be a project that Meridian can be proud of and is a welcome addition to our community. Corrie: Any further comments? Roll call voter Mr. Berg. Roll -call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, Absent; Bird, aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 8. Tabled from February 20, 2001: FP 01-002 Final Plat approval of 82 + 2 existing single-family dwelling lots and 0 other lots on 43.33 acres for observation Pointe Subdivision by Victory 41, LLC — north of Victory Road and east of Meridian Road: Corrie: Council, you have seen the Final Plat. Shari, any changes? vary? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council we did get a revise plat last week. We have not prepared any comments on it. We had several problems with the project because of the fact that a revised plat was submitted to the city. The city did not submit that or the applicant did not submit it to Ada County Highway District either. So the comments that were prepared for the Preliminary Plat were based on two different plats. One that the city saw and one that Ada County Highway District saw. What we just had submitted last week, they tried to resolve a problem created by the city's approval of one thing and Ada County Highway District's approval of something different, and that would have to do with area in this corner. There was some concern from the residents of Meridian Greens that this was going to create a lot of cut through traffic through their subdivision. They wanted to have some kind of traffic calming in this area. What the applicant had proposed to the city was to provide a landscape median in this area in an attempt to slow down the traffic and make it not quite as easy. Ada County Highway District would not approve that plan. Also, in original plan that the City of Meridian approved, it did show all of these as lots within the subdivision and this would be the Kennedy Lateral that runs through here. All of this area down here is not sewerable; it is in a different drainage area. Ada County Highway District indicated they would not sign the Plat unless there was a bridge constructed over the Kennedy Lateral to serve these lots. And that the access to Victory Road was taken out because the Plat that Ada County Highway District also showed a cul- de-sac coming off of overland Road with some lots in here. The applicant had submitted a new Plat to the City of Meridian showing that still as a lot, but their intent was to leave the remaining home there and to not develop that portion until the gravity sewer was available an appropriate trunk sewer line. This is showing you the difference between what was actually approved by the City Council and what was proposed to Ada County Highway District. They felt this was going to H F Meridian City Council Meetingf f March 20, 2001 Page 24 create too much of a problem and an obstruction, and what they had approved apparently is this choked down version. They have not approved this specific configuration, but with slight modifications, they have felt that they could approve this configuration. As we have not prepared comments, I hate to hold this Plat up, but in lieu of us not having comments, it is difficult to recommend approval because we have not reviewed this latest Plat and made any comments. And also we need to address the fact that this latest Plat that they have submitted shows that area down here in the southwest corner as being unplatted now. Which would require them to come back at a later time if they ever wanted to develop that property and submit a new Preliminary Plat, and I am not really sure how that would work. The Kennedy Lateral is shown completely excluded from this latest Plat that has been submitted. I do not see any readily apparent problems with it. We would like them to indicate in Note No. 8 that the single- family structures are to contain a minimum of 2100 square feet excluding the garage as was offered by the applicant during the approval process. And also we would reserve, if you approve this without our comments, the right to check this for conformance with the approved Preliminary Plat and make sure that all of the lots meet or exceed what was approved with that approval. Corrie: Is the developer here this evening? Bird: Yes. Corrie: Maybe you can answer some of those questions for us and then we can see if we have some more. Thank you. Caven: Mike caven, 6874 Fairview, Boise, Idaho. Any questions? Corrie: could you answer some of those questions that she had? caven: I think it makes sense to have that piece down in the corner to be unplatted, but that was a mistake by the engineer when he submitted it. So it is still intended to be a lot if that is what you want it to be, but we would like to submit a Preliminary Plat at some point that the sewer is there. Right now, it is a different drainage, and we would like to hold it out. But if not we can go ahead and put it in as platted lot in the subdivision. It would probably be a second phase instead of in the first phase. So that is the issue there. The choker to the north in lieu of the island, ACHD did not like the island, they asked us to come up with some ideas. I came up with 2 or 3, they did not like any of those and came up with the choker idea, and I said whatever makes anybody happy. I just need to move forward on here, so they have come up with the chokers at the corners there, which is acceptable to us. I think those are the only two questions, unless you had anymore. We do intend on the Plat to put 2100 square foot minimums that was another question that came up. We do not have a problem with that. We intended that that would be the minimum square footage of any home in this subdivision. Meridian City council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 25 Corrie: council, questions? Bird: I have none. Caven: Thank you. Corrie: okay, any questions of staff? Then I will entertain a motion on the question of Final Plat. Nichols: Mr. Mayor -- Corrie: You cannot make a motion. Nichols: I know and I do not intend to. Corrie: okay, Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of council just to let you know when I prepare the order on the Final Plats, we always have staff comments to attach to that, and at this point you do not have any staff comments because this Plat was just delivered last Wednesday. To let you know it is going to be a little bit difficult to put the paper work together until we see what Shari's comments are. Corrie: Well, okay. I have a feeling of what is coming next. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would move that we approve this Final Plat for 32 plus 2 existing lots and 0 other lots on 43.33 acres for observation Pointe subdivision formerly known as Timber View subdivision, Victory Road and Meridian Road, to incorporate the staff's comments when they come about. Corrie: okay, do I hear a second to that? Hearing none, motion lacks a second. It dies. Any other motions? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we table approval of this Final Plat until P & Z staff has a chance to review and comment and we do this properly by our normal procedures, and put it on the council meeting for April 3, 2001. Meridian City Council Meeting 4 March 20, 2001 Page 26 De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to table until April 3, 2991 to give staff time to make their comments, for the attorney to draw up the Final Plat approval if it is given at that time. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Corrie: Two ayes, motion carries. MOTION CARRIED: TWO AYES, ONE NAY, ONE ABSENT Item 9. Continued Public Hearing from February 20, 2001: Az 00-026 Request for annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres from Ada County RT zone to R-8 for a proposed planned development for proposed Kodiak Development by Hubble Engineering — west of Meridian Road one-half mile south of overland Road: Corrie: What will be doing here is I will open the Public Hearing, and we will have the staff do the comments first. Then we will have the developer make their comments, and then if you have signed up for this particular one anyone who is in favor of the annexation and zoning and then we will have those who oppose it. And then last we will have the developer answer any questions that comes up with the other two testimonies. We limit the testimony to 3 minutes. I will give the developer 5 minutes if they need to take it. If they need more, let us know and we will judge from there, so we do not have all this time tonight. I will open the Public Hearing now on request for annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres from Ada County RT zone to R-8 for the proposed planned development, proposed Kodiak Development by Hubble Engineering west of Meridian Road one half mile south of overland Road. And I have nobody signed up to have testimony on that one. Staff comments first. Smith: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council the issue at the last council meeting was sewer serviceability of this property from the extension of sewer that exits Elk Run subdivision through a common lot near the southeast of Elk Run at Highway 59. Last Thursday sometime, I received some engineering information from the applicant's engineer, Hubble Engineering, that drew some cross- sections for the field information that was developed several years ago concerning the location of the underground telephone fiber optics and the relation of the fiber optics to the proposed extension of the sewer line which at the time Elk Run was built was a problem. They were conflicting with each other, both in horizontal locations and in vertical location. The information that has been submitted indicates that we probably do have although I have not been able to concretely determine, but it appears that we do have a problem in extending the sanitary sewer to the south in its present alignment. The proposal by Mr. Jewett is to pick up the sanitary sewer before it gets out into the right-of-way of Highway 69 and extend it south generally along the right-of-way line or slightly outside of Meridian Ci Meeting City Council it u c Mee g March 20, 2001 Page 27 the right-of-way line. Without any other information available as far as utilities other than the power poles that exist out there, it appears that that extension is feasible. I think that we can probably extend that sewer farther south in that alignment. It will require an easement from the property owner, permanent easement. we will probably require some restrictions as far as landscaping in that area is concerned. obviously, no structures would be built. Possibly a signage could be restricted to some degree, but it appears that in order to extend the sewer south along the frontage of this property and into and along the frontage of the property owned by the Nazarene church to the south of Mr. Jewett, it is going to be necessary to get outside of the existing right-of-way of Highway 69 or along the right-of-way line of Highway 69. 1 think with the partnership or with being able to work with the land developers to insure that we have an easement if indeed it is resolved that it is outside the right-of-way and that we have access to that sewer line. That it can be extended to serve this project as well as the Nazarene church project. And I say that with the understanding that there has not been any engineering information developed for other conflicts that may exist out there. As the engineering plans are developed, the detailed plans are developed for the extension because that is not known at this point, but the big question at the last council meeting was whether or not this sewer line can be extended. Based on information that we have looked at to this point, I believe that it can, not in its present alignment, but it can be extended. Again, it is going to take the cooperation of the landowners to allow the easement if necessary on their property along the frontage of the property for this sewer line. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I am not so sure Gary that the issue was can it be because we have been told all along that it can be. The problem was it was in an area where we do not have easement, and the city Council did not feel good about approving a project that we do not have all of the easements and the right-of-way to get the sewer there at this point. And it does not sound like anything has been resolved towards that other than we are down the road 3 weeks later now, and you guys are still saying it can be if everything gets worked out. I guess what I was expecting is that things got worked out during those 3 weeks, and it does not sound like to me that they have. Smith: councilman Anderson, Mayor, and Council it was my recollection that the concern was whether or not the sewer line could be extended in the right-of- way with the fiber optics being where they are. when I left I meeting and then called a meeting with the developer and his engineer that was my question was what can we do with sewer within the public right-of-way to see if it can be extended without having to get easements for the extension. That is how I left the meeting, and that was my understanding. I had in my mind a question whether or Meridian City Council Meeting ' March 20, 2001 Page 28 not that conflict could be resolved within the right-of-way. The information that has been compiled based on previous field exploration and then plotting that information in cross-section views, so we could see where things horizontally, where things where vertically. I do not believe that because of the depth of sewer we have enough space horizontally within the right-of-way to locate the sewer and not impact either the roadway or the fiber optic ducts. Anderson: I understand that. So what you are saying is it cannot go in the right- of-way. We need to get additional easements to put the sewer there, right? Smith: Correct. Anderson: So that needs to be worked out before we can approve this project, rig ht? Smith: The conditions of the approval of the project could be that the easements have to be granted in order to extend the sewer, I would assume. I think that can be a condition of the approval of the project. I have talked to Mr. Jewett; he does not have a problem with it. I have not talked to Nazarene Church, but it is an issue of either the easements are granted if indeed the easement is required, the easement is granted or the project cannot go forward. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Cary, what kind of a condition do we have on the church, that sits on south farther there and we annexed them and said we would put the sewer down there. Of course, I guess this fiber optic thing had not been brought up at that point. We committed to getting the sewer down there to them. Smith: The fiber optics has always been an issue. It has always been known that it was a problem. All the information that I had in my file from the time when the sewer was extended out of Elk Run and into the right-of-way was given to the engineer for the Nazarene Church. I told the Nazarene Church at that time that I did not have a solution for the issue. Siddoway: Mr. Mayor, I think I can shed some light on this and speed this up. Mayor and members of Council the church property has been annexed and zoned, but any development on the property would have to go through the Conditional Use Permit process. And so a condition that can be imposed through the CUP process would be that they grant that easement for the sewer alignment that goes along the front of their property. It is not an exaction because it is related to the use that would intent to put there, so that could be done. Also, I guess my question is would Elk Run's common lot have to give an easement, Elk Meridian city Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 29 Run Subdivision would have to give an easement to the city for this sewer line in addition to Mr. Jewett? Smith: The Plat says that there is a Loft utility easement common to exterior boundary of the subdivision, and the exterior boundary is, if you interpret the exterior boundary as being the rear of the lots then the common area is outside the rear of those lots. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Gary, does that take us down to Mr. Jewett's property then? Smith: Yes. Bird: I mean the right-of-way through Elk Run takes us down to his property and then on to the Smith: The Kennedy Lateral runs along the south boundary of the Elk Run subdivision, south and west boundary. Bird: But where you come out to the east there and come down the right-of-way that is all Elk Run until you hit his property, other than the lateral through there. Smith: I am sorry, I did not hear what you started with. Bird: His north end of his property butts up to the south end of Elk Run except for Lateral. Smith: It butts up to the south boundary of the Lateral. Bird: of the Lateral. So we have to go through the Lateral. Smith: Yes, it has to go under the Lateral. I am not sure if that Lateral is on — l guess it is on the Elk Run property. It is part of the Elk Run property, and then it was given as an easement or it is an easement to the Elk Run property. The fences on Elk Run are held back off of that Lateral so there is an access road along there. The Lateral was piped along its entire length of the boundary, adjacent to the boundary of Elk Run subdivision, so they would have to bore under the Kennedy Lateral to extend to the south. Bird: I had a question of just making sure that we could easements, that we did not have some other property owners involved. Smith: Right. Well, I have talked to Mr. Jewett and he is agreeable to that. Meridian City council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 30 Corrie: Any other questions at this point? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Developer. Jewett: Jim Jewett, 4002 West Teeter, Meridian. I concur with Gary and we have discussed it. I agree with the easements. The Church is here, they will agree with the easements, so I Will stand for questions. I would just like to move forward. Bird: I have none. De Weerd: I have none. Jewett: Thank you. Corrie: okay, thank you. Nobody signed up, is that correct? De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: Public hearing, Item No. 0 is closed. Discussion? De Weerd: I have none. Corrie: Then I will entertain a motion on the request for annexation and zoning. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: I move that we approve the request for annexation and zoning of 5.4 acres from Ada county RT zone to R-8 for a proposed planned development for proposed Kodiak Development by Hubble Engineering to incorporate all staff Meridian City Council Meeting i March 20, 2001 Page 31 comments in addition to the most recent discussed tonight and for the Attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the request for annexation and zoning with incorporating all staff comments and the attorney drawing up the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law next meeting. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I just we want to make sure that we clarified in the motion about those easements because Cary said when he was talking about it that it could be a condition. I just want to make sure that that is one of the conditions that you want to put on? De Weerd: That would be my intent. Corrie: Any other comments? Hearing none, Mr. Berg if you will give us a Roll - call vote please. Roll -call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, absent; Bird, aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 10. Continued Public Hearing from March 5, 2001: VAR 00-019 Request for a variance to exceed maximum building height of 35 feet and reduce the 30 -foot setback requirement to 20 feet along the 53 feet of the one-story section of the building for proposed Ameritel Inn by B & A Development — Eagle Road north of 1-84: Item 11. Public Hearing: CUP 00053 Request for Conditional Use Permit for a three-story, 87 -room hotel in an L -O zone for proposed Ameritel Inn by B & A Development - Eagle Road and 1-84: Corrie: Now Item No. 10 and 11, Item 10 is a request for variance on the Ameritel Inn and Item 11 is the Public Hearing request for a Conditional Use Permit. I think we are going to have to switch those around. 11 needs to come before 10. Conditional Use Permit before we have the variance. So at this time I will open them both and we take Item 11 first. Corrie: We will take the Conditional Use Permit first and have staff comments first. Meridian City council Meeting _,1 March 20, 2001 Page 32 Stiles: Mr. Mayor, you are opening both Public Hearings at the same time? Corrie: Yes. Stiles: okay. Mr. Mayor and members of Council this is for the property located just immediately west of the existing Chevron, McDonalds, Credit Union on Eagle Road and Magic View Drive. It is directly south of the existing Green Hill Estate subdivision. There was a previous application for a planned development of this lot that included both of these lots for a use of 3 office buildings, one with a two- story building and one perhaps with an accessory restaurant. They are now returning with a new plan to provide a three-story Ameritel Inn on this lot. And the variance that they are requesting would be for the height requirement. To exceed the height requirement which is currently 35 feet, and the setback requirement of 20 feet along what is now know as Allen Street, the new section that has been constructed to connect to Magic View Drive from the signal light on Eagle Road that goes into St. Luke's. You have our staff comments and the recommendation from the Planning and Zoning commission. This is the proposed plan, site plan that was submitted with the application, the landscaping. There was a question on the height that according to the initial elevations that we received, we had believed this to be a parapet, which according to our definition in our zoning Ordinance, a parapet would not be included as part of the overall height. The way our ordinance reads is that it would be from the finished floor elevation up to the roofline. However, when we received some additional elevations, it did indicate that this was not a parapet and through consulting several other architects they indicated that they would consider that to be a gabled roof, and therefore, they would be required to have the variance to the height. We did get another letter dated March 15, 2001 from Mr. Chris Korte indicating that he still believes it does not apply to this building because of the way the ordinance is written. But we still believe with staff that it is a gable roof and needs to be included in the overall height of the building. And that a variance would be required as a part of the application. The setback requirement, even though Ada County Highway District has determined that Allen Street is not a collector, when the remaining within the Magic View subdivision is re -designated to another use besides single-family residential and the 5 acre residential lots are not there. It will well exceed the requirements for a collector. Ada County Highway District stance in the past has been to not designate anything, much of anything as a collector, because that would require them to participate in the cost of constructing the roadway. We have a difference of opinion as to what a collector is. The Planning and Zoning commission did recommend denial of the project. We have their recommendations. It is a beautiful building. It would be a great addition to the city of Meridian. It was just felt that this was not the appropriate location for it. Since I think we are in here for a while on this one, I will end unless you have any questions. *** End of Side Two *** Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 33 Smith: Mr. Mayor and Members of council, my name is Byron Smith. I reside at 650 East cougar Drive in Meridian. I am the corporate Architect for Ameritel Inns. I just wanted to give you a little introduction as to who Ameritel Inns is. We are a locally owned business. our corporate offices are about two miles east of the proposed site, and I just wanted to give you kind of a little overview on what we are. We cater to mid -upscale type corporate travelers, and we take a lot of pride in our properties and the communities that we locate in. We are primarily based in the northwest. As part of your packets, I think you got some pictures of some of our properties here. This is our Ameritel Inn in Idaho Falls; it kind of shows you what exterior kind motive is of our corporate image there. This is the lobby of our Boise spectrum property, and we are proposing to do the same type of quality construction at this facility. This would be our breakfast -lounge area out at the Spectrum property. This is a typical room, it is a kitchen suite, and this is a typical conference room. We do have a small conference facility in the hotel. This would be a spa suite that is part of spectrum property, then an executive suite. We are not proposing a bar/restaurant. We do offer a continental breakfast. We are exciting about the possibility of locating in Meridian. The owner of the company, Mr. Black, has lived in the Meridian area for a number of years. With that I would like turn it over to our consultant that we have hired. Chris Korte to help with some of the issues that have come up on this project to work with neighbors, and with that I will turn it over to Chris. one last thing, this is just kind of an example of some of the exterior landscape. This is the Spectrum property, which is over by the Edward's theatres. This property was opened in November of 1998, as you can see we go far beyond the minimum requirements of the Landscape ordinances. When we develop our projects we want to establish a presence and look like we have been there for a while instead of waiting 20 years for the landscaping to mature. Thank you. Korte: Mr. Mayor and Members of council my name is Chris Korte and my office address is 499 Main Street in Boise, Idaho. I have had the opportunity to work on two other Ameritel Inns in the Boise area, and I am very proud of my client. I am very proud of what he builds. It is a joy to work with him because they do not skimp on anything. They go the extra mile and Glen Black asked me to get involved in this issue because of our neighboring property owners and some of the issues and concerns that you are fairly well aware of over the past years. Before I get into the specific presentation, we have a series of photographs that you have seen, I think that we put in your packet to you, but I would like to be able to go over and explain some of the things that we have done. First I would like to talk to you just briefly about why Eagle Road and Interstate 84, why as Ameritel Inns looked at this location. What is very important to them is the issue that Highway 55 and Eagle Road, which is Eagle Road, and the Interstate, Highway 55 is the only north/south highway in this valley that goes anywhere. It carries a significant amount of tourist traffic as well as does Interstate 84. It is very important to have a presence near that tourist traffic. Though that is not perhaps the largest portion of their business, it is a very important segment of their business. Also, as you know there is a tremendous amount of land use Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 34 change going on in this general area. You have Jabil that has been built, which has corporate offices that bring in people into this community. You have the Treasure Valley retirement community, which is being built east of St. Luke's medical center, which is going to be a tremendously large project that is going to also have need for hotel accommodations. Tonight you will be looking at a Sundance Center, a project by Sundance, on the south side of the freeway. You have Blue Cross; did you receive a letter from Blue Cross in support of this project? They did submit a letter to you. I do not know if you got it in your packet, but I do have a copy of it that I can provide to you. They have indicated that they support this request because they have numerous individuals that come into town and would like an upscale hotel facility near them to be able to provide accommodations, and this letter comes from Blue Shield. The next issue is St. Luke's Meridian Regional Medical Center, there is no doubt in my mind, I worked for St. Luke's in the past, that that facility will be the largest medical complex in Treasure Valley, and it is coming very fast as you know. There are many, many people that will be coming to that because it is a regional facility and have friends and loved ones that are going to operated on and worked on and having an opportunity for a hotel of this nature across the street from St. Luke's, we believe is a very important opportunity. And being directly across the street, there is not a lot of travel involved. We also know that there a physicians that are going to be attending St. Luke's that come in that would like to have an upscale hotel capability adjacent to that hospital where they can come back to their suite and go back over to St. Luke's. St. Luke's is going to build a significant amount of office development at that location as well as other entities are going to building medical office. There is also some corporate offices going in. I think you may have received a letter from Hubble Engineering which has their corporate office adjacent to this site, who also are in favor of this request because they have clients that come into town and having that opportunity for this type of facility near them is important. Finally, as it relates to that intersection, just as shopping centers look at specific corners of an intersection so does a hotel. Shopping centers like to be on the going home side of traffic. The northwest corner of the interchange is very important because Highway 55 terminates there and turns into the freeway and of course the interstate itself. If you go south of the interchange down to overland from our clients perspective, which relates to that traveling public, it is almost like falling off of the earth because that end of the interchange is almost 3/ of a mile away from what is going on the northern portion. So all of those land use issues are driving an urbanization of that intersection, as you know. It is a very prime location. Now understanding that we have an existing subdivision located there, and I am concerned, my client is concerned and I think we are all concerned regarding the residents within that subdivision. They have had a bomb dropped on them. When Eagle Road was built and the interchange was built, this massive land use change has occurred, and what you are seeing here is classic urbanization. You are seeing a change of land use driven by a majbr project that the public put in. We want to do everything that we can possibly do to help them and our presentation tonight will graphically explain what we did in doing this. We had one neighborhood meeting r Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 30 that we held here. We held another meeting at the Ameritel Inn at the Spectrum to try and explain to our neighbors and get their input on what we want to do, and with that Shari if we could go with the ground existing. This is looking to the west on the property, this would be Allen Street and the road coming around, if you continue to move over these are the houses on the north side of the street with about a aft berm located along the area. And as you continue around over to Eagle Road and the St. Luke's project sits to the east. The next one Shari. Now from the perspective of a buffer this is looking towards the west, and if you continue across this is the type of vegetation that exists during 6-7 months out of the year. Basically that entire area is heavily landscaped and heavily buffered, from a buffering issue if we were in Seattle, we probably would not be having an issue there because the entire area would be forested. As you look at that you can tell that the buffer in the summertime is almost complete. If you added just supplemental landscaping in there that would be such a dense type of situation you would not see it. The next one Shari. What we have done here is place the fence approximately 6ft in height from the ground level, and this picture was taken at the corner of the location of where the building would be located. These trees in here, we have agreed to place 12-15 trees in here that are a minimum of 16ft in height strategically located in relationship to each on of these houses. You can see the red line there, that is 15ft, you can see a person standing there that is 6ft, and then this goes to the end of the property. Now after meeting with the neighbors and working this, we are willing to establish as a condition of approval that we will extend that fence all the way down to Eagle Road to help mitigate some of the problems and issues that have been brought up with the convenience store and the gas station that is along the south side of the road. We think that that is the right thing to do. The neighbors have been working with us and we will agree to have that as a condition of approval. If you could do the next one, Shari. This would be an example of that 6ft fence in the summertime. Again with the type of vegetation that is already there in the summertime and again placing the 15ft trees strategically located as it relates to each house. So in essence what you see there from a ground level perspective is a complete buffer. All the traffic that is going to be on this road, and incidentally whether Ameritel Inn is there or not that road has been built and that traffic is going to be there. So the opportunity to help build that fence and buffer that off to me is a great attribute to the neighborhood. Then what we did is we went and we got a lifter, lets look at the cross-section, what we.did is we started looking at from a house, single -story and two-story, what type of buffer is needed in this location to shield the building. There is about 340ft between the house itself and the structure. As you can see, if you get 15ft to loft in here the white lines represent the person sitting or standing on the ground and the purple lines represent being from a second floor window. So if we look at placing a berm in here 4ft with a 6ft fence and minimum 15ft tall trees with the berm 4ft in here and those same type of trees clustered in the berms, we can start to create an effective buffer from the project. So we then went and got a lifter and this would be the existing condition in the wintertime from the third floor. This would be looking to the west, what want you to notice in this picture is the series of out buildings that have been Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 36 placed by the residents that effectively shield the vast majority of these homes from any view at all towards this site. If you go along here from that third floor view, if you will stop right here, this would be the butt end of the building, in other words, the narrow piece of the building faces towards the neighborhood. There are no windows for rooms located there, so anybody that is in the hotel would not be looking at this area here at all because that would be the stairwell that goes down. Probably a view out of a window would be from approximately this location here going over towards St. Luke's. With this in mind, we then again placed the 5ft landscaped fenced, which is part of the Development Agreement to the west and bringing that across. Again strategically locating these trees in locations in relationship to the homes then this fence would continue on down at a minimum of Eft in height all the way down to Eagle Road to take the issues of the lights and the traffic that is currently being done at the Chevron. Corrie: Chris, I am going to ask you not to go through all of those. Korte: okay, I will just go through two more from the lot no buffer. one of the neighbors was gracious enough to allow us to go into their backyard to place this building to take a look at how this buffer would work. You will see the forklift and that is basically level with where the third floor window is located. So with this being the existing condition, this would be with the 5ft fence located and the landscaping, and what you can see is the butt end of the building is all you see as you look at the property. The further to the west and the further to the east you go, the more of the building you can see. one more, so what we have done here, this is 135ft of landscaping, I think your ordinance would probably require loft, this is berm, a series of large, mature trees. Here is berm located here. This piece of property is about 57 percent landscaping in this plan, far and excess of anything that Ameritel Inn has done before. we believe that the building itself is going to mitigate some of the issues that the neighbors have been concerned about. A lot of them see the McDonald's sign. A lot of them see the Texaco sign, and a lot of them see those very bright lights that are in that Fast Eddy's Chevron. This building will shield some of those neighbors from that type of impact. In the development of this project, we have agreed not to request a large sign, a freestanding sign, of any sort. The sign would be placed upon the building itself, and we would go to the bromine, and some of this issue is going to . relate to the variance request that has been submitted with this application. Ameritel Inn is very proud of their architectural design. They believe that the design of the building is what attracts people knowing that this is a class operation. We can come in and we could cut right across here and be underneath the 35ft height limit, and I think that you can visualize what you would get with that situation. The ceiling of this building is under 35ft. It is the architectural treatment that makes the building interesting, that is what you see in this application. It is the essence of the building. By being able to put an internally illuminated sign on this portion of the building, aesthetically is very pleasing, it is buffered from the neighbors to the west because it is not a freestanding sign. This sign would not be proposed on the north side, and that sign would be located on the south side over in here. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 37 These trees by the way are about the height of the trees that were planted in their project in Idaho Falls. The height and the mass of the building are a very, very important point of this application. If I can go to the variance issue, you have two definitions in your ordinance. one is what the definition of building height is, which Shari went over, and the other is what is called exceptions to height regulations. The height limitation contained in the zoning schedule does not apply to spires, belfries, copulas, pole antennas, or other appurtenance not usually required to be placed above level and not intended for human occupancy. This facility right here has no human occupancy in it at all. It is an architectural treatment that is very important to the building itself. We believe that Council has every opportunity to interpret your ordinance to indicate that that architectural feature, which does not have any human habitation or does have some mechanical equipment in it, is exempt form the height regulation. If you believe that a variance for that is required, we believe that the adequate finding can be made that that application is an intricate part of the architecture of the building. You may made a similar Finding of Fact on the United Heritage building, where they came in and requested a height variance. I would suggest that the Council consider amending your code to make a height exception a Conditional Use Permit, so that you can then be able to look at architectural features and put conditions on them appropriately. So we believe that as it relates to the height exception that you can easily rule, if you so believe that it is an architectural appurtenance to the building that this portion is appropriate. Now I do have a picture here. The picture that I have submitted to you is an AmeriteI in Washington, and what you will see there is the parapet center portion with no roof. It is chopped off and placed in the back. Underneath your ordinance that would be considered a parapet and would be allowed. My client after doing that once said that he would never do it again because in his opinion a pretty cheesy looking addition to the building. It just does not fit or conform, but that would be considered a parapet and would allowed under your ordinance. So I hope that you would end up considering that variance to be allowed. The swimming pool variance on the back of the building, it is not designated as a collector street. If it is not designated as a collector, we do not need a variance because the setback is only loft. If it was deemed a collector, it needs to be 30ft, but I think it is only single -story in height. It is well landscaped and well buffered, and there are no residential uses around it, so we hope that you would consider that variance as appropriate if you believe that we need a variance. In summary, I know that I have tried to pack a lot information into a short period of time. My client has gone the extra mile in this request. He has agreed to not put up a freestanding sign, he has agreed to 1 35ft of buffered, mature landscaping. He has agreed to add additional trees to the berm. He has agreed to build a fence at least Eft in height all the way out to Eagle Road, and he has agreed to build a very quality product and project in Meridian in our opinion in a location that is highly justified. I think that you have to look at, and I know that this is a tough one when they are tough like this they are hard on you, but you have an urbanizing interchange and there are demands and needs that go with that interchange, and we think that we have met the standard to buffer the neighborhood. We have worked with those people, Meridian city council Meeting i March 20, 2001 Page 38 and I hope that you will consider approving both the Conditional Use Permit and the Variance. And I assume I will have some rebuttal time, sorry to take such a lengthy period of time, but there is a lot of information. Thank you. Corrie: I have a Don Reiswig that is speaking. Reiswig: Mr. Mayor and Members of council my name is Don Reiswig. I reside at 3350 North Montvue Drive, and I speak also as representative of the Touchmark of the Treasure Valley. I have looked at this project here, and they have taken into consideration the needs for the traffic to get out on Eagle Road, which is a problem. There is traffic there. With the growth of the medical office building and the medical community in this area and with the retirement community that is coming in here, I feel that this is a project that we can support, we would request that you give serious consideration for the approval of this project. Corrie: Dave Percy? Dave Percy: Mr. Mayor and Members of council my name Dave Percy. I live at 575 Wells Street in Meridian in the Magic View subdivision. It would just be west of this project. I fully support the Ameritel Inn at the present conditions that they presented it. Thank you. Betty Percy: Betty Percy, 575 Wells Street, Meridian, Idaho. I live just west of the Ameritel Project that they are proposing, and I just wanted it on record that I do support the Ameritel Project. Winn: Mr. Mayor and Members of council my name is Randy Winn. I live at 3071 South Slate creek in Meridian, and I am in favor of the Ameritel Inn. I believe it will be a great contribution to the city of Meridian. I think it is time we started looking at some other assets for the community, and this seems to be a good one. I think the location is going to be very helpful for us. Thank you. Corrie: okay, those are the ones that we had signed up for the project. We have three, four here that are against. Cary Childe? Childe: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council my name is Gary Childe. I live at 3157 Autumn Way. My property is at the corner section of Eagle Road and subdivision. I am opposed to the project. I am not opposed to the architectural features in some respects. I think it is a great design. I do think that possibly approving a variance of up to maybe 20ft additional in height when you have a gable roof sitting there, not a parapet, a gable roof, so you 20ft additional that you are looking at proposing on top of the 35ft. From my house we are looking at an increase probably a 70% increase in height that I am staring at all of the time. One thing that was not spoken of is the lighting. I did not hear anything about lighting on the site other than the sign that they are going to move to the one side of the building. I am concerned with how many light fixtures are going to be on Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 .Page 39 the property. They indicated about landscaping, which primarily only affects those adjoining the hotel directly in view of the hotel on the north end. The talk about landscaping, putting trees up. As Byron Smith says, we do not want to trees that resemble something that is just put in. We want to have something that looks like it has been there awhile. well, I guess in order to do that you would have to determine how big a tree would be over a 20-, 25 -year period and probably suggest or put into the plan that those trees be implemented all the way down to Eagle Road and not just in the very short section of what they have proposed to do. They show these views of what the trees look along our fence lines in the summer. Well six months or so out of the year those trees are bare, and they did not show any views of what our houses are right now looking down upon all of the service stations and the McDonald's signs. I am concerned with the height, as it is the signage, the lack of introduction to the lighting as part of the package that they are looking at presenting. I think their fences are admirable that they would come forward and suggest that, but I have not seen anything myself personally on exactly where and how that is going to be located on the berm itself, and also in relationship to other landscaping that should go all the way down to the end of Eagle Road. I have contacted Ada County Highway District two weeks ago. I have asked them about the traffic situation on that corner. I have asked them why they have decreased the synchronization of the timing for the lights on that corner, and they said well because we have a lot of traffic. If you go down to that corner right now, you cannot cross that light at all. You cannot cross it without running because that light changes within a matter of 15-20 seconds. Again, they have indicated that there is a lot growth. You have the hospital, you have a hotel being proposed, you have gas stations, you have Jackson's which is bringing up to 200 to 300 semis a month being parked on their lot as a weigh station for unloading into Walgreen's and Albertson's and Wal-Mart. I do not think that that is right. We are looking at possibly more problems with the added feature of a hotel, which is only going to create more problems with congestion and traffic and the problem with Ada County not wanting to stand behind their requirements that they should be looking into here with the traffic situation. I do not think any amount of height in the fence or trees is going to take care of the traffic, congestion, noise, or pollution that we have created in that corner right there. I think that if you approve this hotel, I think you should stand by your code, and I think you should keep the height at 35ft. 1 think there should be a comprehensive landscaping package and lighting package that has been addressed or should be addressed. I think there also should be a fire protection plan that goes with this. Because I have not heard anything about how they are going to take care of the needs of this whole area when you have a lack of fire protection and police protection for the City of Meridian. So I think there are a lot of issues to be looked at here, and you have a big job as far as the growth ahead of you. And I do not think that dumping it on that intersection is the right move. Thank you. Meridian City Council Meeting Y March 20, 2001 Page 40 Seger: Rick Seger at 2951 Autumn Way also a resident of Green Hills Estates. Mayor and council would it be okay if 1 showed a couple of slides very quickly on this projector underneath here? Corrie: sure, you have three minutes. Seger: I would be curious if some of the folks for this, I think for the record it would be nice to know if any of them are residents of Green Hills Estates. There were several people that came up, and I am just curious for the record if they were residents. I do not think any of them were. i would like to make just a couple of quick points, and I will try to make this very quick. First off, we think there are a lot of options for this hotel. It is not a choice of approval versus letting the land stand. It is going to get used. This is the busiest intersection in Idaho; it is going to get used. It is going to have something on it. Let us put something that is in conjunction with the current plan. Let us go with what we agreed with the developer on, let us go with what we agreed with Planning and zoning, and let us go with what we agreed with city council last time around as to what the plan was to be. Let us not take the first option. We think that -- again this is not an option of approval versus losing a hotel that the city needs. The hotel wants to be here, there is plenty of land still available. There is going to be multiple hotels that will vie for that land as long as there are customers and there is a hospital going in there. So I think that saying that the first one along is the one that we approve is a big mistake. The number one issue that I personally have with this and talking with other residents is the fact that you are putting a 24-hour facility right next door to where our kids are playing on a regular basis. It is in our backyards. I would be happy to stream a whole slew of people from the neighborhood here to hand you letters that say we are not in favor in this. I am not sure what one letter from a Blue cross or Blue Shield what that means. It is kind of irrelevant. We are not bringing a steady stream of people that like to play soccer in these backyards and like to know that they are safe back there. It is just a fact that when you plan for a development, you plan it correctly. I want to address the bomb that got dropped on us is not Eagle Road, we have predicted Eagle Road for years, and the members of Green Hills Estates have been coming to these meetings for years. We recognize that this is going to happen. We are not against the growth. We just are asking for the growth according to the Agreement that we have always had in place here. The last time all this went. There is a certain amount of trust that needs to be developed. Now, when we talk about the trust, I want to show you a couple of pictures of what we have been experiencing over the last couple of years. Number one the fence currently adjacent to McDonald's is pretty consistent to the one that they showed here in council when they got approval originally, but they also showed us a beautiful fence just like the one we are seeing now adjacent to our houses. We are seeing all of those beautiful fences again, seeing the beautiful pictures again, and yet this is what actually happens. After it is approved, there is no enforcement of what is shown. This is the entryway into Meridian; this is the first impression that people are getting based on the work that has been done so far. Back to a little r Meridian City Council Meeting. March 20, 2001 Page 41 bit of trust here, I feel like the pictures that you were seeing are quite deceiving as to what is really happening and what the real view — this is a picture standing on the property, the Ameritel property, whatever kind of lens he is using to show those beautiful pictures to us, it is an exaggerated view pushing the real image way out. This is an actual picture taken with a regular camera standing on their property and shining straight into their yards. You cannot see it on the bottom here, but you can actually see there property right here at the bottom of the screen all the way through to the quote 4ft berm that we were promised. Now, let me just go through a quick list for you, we have been promised that the Texaco sign was not going to be the way that it was, of course this thing somehow got passed through without the neighbors ever knowing, the Chevron sign, and there is now a truck stop there when we were explicitly told that this was not going to be a truck stop when all of this went in. You can go there at any time during the day and find anywhere from 9 to 12 trucks hanging around there. These are directly in our backyard, and they are using this road right here because they cannot turn around anywhere else. They are being told to use this area as a staging point. They have got all this talk of a beautiful Eft fence that was going to be between these properties and ours; they do not exist. They have never been there. We get the chain-link fence. We were told a 4ft berm, again a beautiful presentation, great show, it never happens, and we have seen this over and over again now. The latest was, we were told and I have for your record, the last plan that was submitted and approved, agreed to by the rest of the community, and it shows a one-story building up against our neighborhood. That is still what we are insisting be there. A one-story building like it was originally agreed to. This was the pian from the developer that said that was what was going in. I am more than happy to leave this with you. I will leave those with you as well. The last point wanted to make was that literally the only bomb that has been dropped on us is not Eagle Road. We have expected that. We have been planning with you for years. The bomb is a 24-hour facility, three stories, directly in our backyard, and no matter how their lenses make it look the reality is that it is directly in our backyard and it is directly looking at this. We are on record as being absolutely against another set of fiascoes where it gets approved and there is no control as to what goes in. I want to tell one more story. He said he is working with the neighbors. And it kind of bothers me because we did go and talk to Chris and try to get an 8ft fence or do some kind of concession to add to this, and the comment was well if you want to kick in your own money but we are not going to do it. I will also point out that the last time they presented at Planning and Zoning, they were 22 -foot trees all along this fence, and he shows a picture of what is probably a 25 -foot to a 30 -foot tree right there in front of the building and says it is just what is at the other locations. I feel like we are getting deceived again or getting set up, and I would love to hear the rebuttal but nothing that is going to be said here is going to convince me that a 24-hour facility in our backyard is going to be justifiable. It is more irritating than anything that they keep trying. Corrie: Thank you. okay, Michael Lloyd. r t Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 42 Lloyd: H1, I am Michael Lloyd. I live at 3091 East Autumn way. The thing that I wanted to say is that we had a gam to Spm business in the Credit Union just to the east of this property. we now have a gam to Spm unit in terms of Mountain State Bank just to the west. The neighbors believed and thought they were going to have similar types of development on this property. Ameritel had gone to some great lengths to improve the buffer, go beyond what they were expected, to extend the fence down the way, and I believe that the Council can put into place if they approve this development, directly into the CUP the type of requirements that would make sure the mistakes would not happen again. I think the council needs to do that. But the point I wanted to make was that in my opinion this is not an issue with Ameritel. This is an issue with the type of use that goes into this area. I know that the city may not agree with me, but I believe that they should sent a strong message to the developers that for this area one-story buildings, office gam to Spm is what should be developed behind our homes. And that is my personal opinion. If they cannot do that, I can tell you something that would be worse for me, and it may not be worse for all of the neighbors. what would be worse would be to leave this thing open-ended with that provision in there for the CUP so that the developer can come back over and over and over again with additional hotels, 24-hour restaurants which to me are just as objectionable, or those types of developments that ultimately could be much worse than the Ameritel that is proposed. In all honesty, a one-story budget motel in my opinion may meet all of the requirements for height that the city has, but that is going to be even less acceptable to me personally than some of these other things that are there. Again, I honesty believe that the issue is the use, and the issue about that use applies to all inns, all lodges, all hotels, all restaurants other than an ancillary restaurant which was originally proposed which would be something internal to secondary to an office building. And that is all I would like to say. Corrie: Thank you. Let us see, I think it was chuck Horel. Horel: Mr. Mayor and members of council my name is chuck Horel. I live at 3043 Autumn Way, which is in Green Hill Estates. We are directly behind the proposed project here. A year ago we were all here before you, and the Development Agreement that was reached with WH -Moore was accepted. It was not contested by the residents of Green Hill Estates. It was entered into in good faith. That particular Development Agreement as you all know called for a buffering with one-story, professional buildings between the residents and subsequent commercial developments. In the past, we have almost become on a first name basis. It seems like not last names with the chevron and the McDonald's and that development over there. originally there was a hotel proposed over there, and you all denied that. You concluded that that was not in the best interests and it did not comply with the comprehensive Plan that you all have in place, and it did not serve as a buffer between that subsequent commercial development and the residential properties. We would hope that you would feel the same way about this project. This is a very nice project. I am not going to say it is not. The presentation of this is very nice. And I think most of the members and residents Meridian City Council Meeting March 24, 2031 Page 43 of Green Hill Estates would endorse this project if it were to be placed across Magic View Drive, on the south side of Magic View Drive, which puts us out of that buffering Zone if you would. I do not mean to step on anybody's toes here, but roughly a month ago the Mayor gave the speech on the state of city address and in part of that it was reported by the Idaho Statesman and *** End of Side Three *** Horel: -- the Mayor made was that we have a plan in place, and we are going to stick by it. I take that we as a cumulative we of the government in the City of Meridian, and that includes all of the Council members here, and Planning and Zoning members. Planning and Zoning has already denied this application. We ask that you also deny this application. We know that there is roughly 70 acres to be developed over on the south side of Magic View. Again, we would endorse the Ameritel Inn or subsequent developments of that sort to go in over there, but we are asking you to keep in place those types of buffering between residential and commercial/professional offices or whatever that development is deemed. And keep those things in place that we talked about before, that we have professional offices, single -story with nice landscaping that are Sam to Spm that are not 24-hour services. one question to you all, and I do not know if you can answer this tonight or not, but if a variance is granted for this project, and another project comes on line and is applied for are you setting a precedent by allowing for the variance? And then if that variance is granted is the subsequent project guaranteed? Corrie: The answer is no. Horel: It is not. Thank you, I appreciate that candidness. one more comment and am done. And I know the people came up and said they endorse this project live in and around the proposed project and probably stand to gain monetarily by the appreciation of value in their properties on a commercial type basis if this project is okayed. I appreciate your time, thank you. Corrie: Thank you, Chuck. We will be on a last -name basis. That is all we have. Byron Smith: I just wanted to clarify one thing just very quickly. I think this concept plan I suspect was given to you, which is what we submitted approximately a year ago. And I guess I just want to make a clarification because I know the issue of trust is important and I can appreciate that. That when we submitted that that was precisely that, a concept plan. It was our best guess at the time. The reason we needed to do that was in order to get the street going with ACH D, which we did Construct for them. So I do not what the Council to get the impression that that was cast in concrete. If you look back through the minutes, it will speak to the fact of concept, and in fact, in the Development plan it does say that if it is anything other than office, we will come back for a Conditional Use Permit. Again, it was a concept plan, some people might say it Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 44 was a swag. It was the best guess at that time, and that is all it was because we frankly did not know at that time. Corrie: You have the rebuttal. Lets keep it down, thank you. Korte: Thank you Mayor and Members of the Council -- Corrie: I will give you five minutes Chris. Korte: -- I would just like to comment regarding Mr. Seger's comments. I have been in this business almost 30 years, and my success in my business is my reputation. I did those pictures specifically so that you could understand the elements of what we were doing. I take it very badly when somebody comes in here and indicates to me that I am trying to do trick photography. My goodness gracious I was trying to present to the Council and to the neighbors exactly what the issues were and how we could help mitigate their problem. I hope that you understand that. It really frustrates me. I have put together a project trying to meet the concerns of that neighborhood, putting in those trees, putting that fence. Now, regarding the issue of the fence, we have met with some of the neighbors. At the Planning and Zoning commission meeting, there was probably four times the amount of testimony in opposition to this request, and we have continued to work with them. Regarding the fence from this location out to Eagle Road, we have agreed to put in a Eft -vinyl fence, and this is the type of material. It is a 30 -year guaranteed type fence. Some of the neighbors on the north side of the street would like to see that 8ft in height, and we have agreed to work with them. We would agree to install a Eft -vinyl fence the entire length of that property out to Eagle Road. The neighbors have agreed, some of them have agreed to help share in the cost to go 8ft, so we would like to work with them to accomplish that task. If it needs a variance application, we will submit a variance application to the City of Meridian to accomplish that task. They have given us six options for that fence. So we want to work with them, and 1 when I have a condition of approval here that I am going to give to you, it says construct a vinyl fence a minimum of 8ft in height from the end of Magic View Partner fence to Eagle Road. I am saying a minimum because if indeed this is approved and the neighbors want to go eight feet, we will be coming back to you with that variance. I think that Shari said on the C -G zone, we could go 8 feet. So really only half of the fence would be an issue in going 8ft in height. The Development Agreement, I know Jonathon Seel hit on that. I cannot indicate to you what you adopted. You know what you adopted more than I do. I can say that that Development Agreement specifically said that the office plan was outright allowed, but it says specifically in that Development Agreement anything else is a Conditional Use Permit. And as being a Conditional Use Permit then the Council can establish higher standards for a development to help mitigate neighboring impacts. Indeed that is what we have done on this application is to mitigate those impacts. Regarding the issue of lighting, I would like to indicate to you that -- Shari, could you go to the site plan -- if this piece of property were developed as an office Meridian city council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 45 zone, as just an office use I do believe that your setback standard for a parking lot is 20ft. Is that correct, Shari? Stiles: If it were a collector we would ask for 30 feet. Korte: okay. Within that buffer between that neighborhood is 135 feet of landscaping and a berm, trees, flowers, et cetera. If that was developed as an office building, you could have an office parking lot 30 feet or 20 feet from the edge of that street. That buffer that you are going to see built in this location in here is going to help shield all of the issues of those lights. The other issue I would like to address is people stay in a hotel for the purpose of sleeping. And anybody that resides in that hotel is as sensitive to lights as their neighboring property owners are. And so we are concerned about the lighting of this project and will indeed establish a lighting plan that meets the ordinance but meets our tenants and meets our clients. There was some testimony from Mr. childe who lives at the corner of Eagle Road. He moved into that house in September of 2000. He moved into that house knowing that Fast Eddy's was there, knowing that those signs were there, knowing that all of those issues were there. okay, if I have made a mistake then I will apologize. I was under the impression that he had, but in any case we are willing to build that fence to help mitigate the problems that were caused by previous applications. We are willing to build that fence to help mitigate those forms of uses. To assure that those conditions are met, I would like to submit to you at least three added conditions of approval that we would like you to consider. First would be compliance with plans on file dated blank or as amended by the commission or council, that date is the files and information that you see this evening on the March 20, 2001 hearing. Second would be supplemental landscaping shall be placed along the north berm. Said landscaping shall consist of a minimum of 12 evergreen columnar trees, a minimum of 1 5ft in height. And contrary to Mr. Seger's comments if you noticed what I showed on those pictures, I showed 15 feet to 20 feet in height. I did not exaggerate that. We have agreed to do that. Strategically located to buffer existing homes directly to the north from the hotel. what we want to do there is to be able to go in and work with those neighbors and be able to locate that building and go in and locate those trees strategically so that they buffer those people's homes. The putting in of those 12 specific large trees, I mean these are big trees, may come as we build the hotel, or we will go out there and we will scale the hotel in and we will sit in their backyards with them and put those trees in. The third condition would be construct a vinyl fence a minimum of six feet in height from the end of Magic View Partner fence to Eagle Road, and that condition would also, we would like to be able to submit a variance application to you for an 8ft fence for those portions of that fence that those neighbors want an 8 feet fence built. Finally, I suggest, and I have not written this down to commit our commitment to you that no occupancy permit shall be issued to this hotel until all conditions of approval have been met and signed off by the city of Meridian. Now, by placing those forms of conditions of approval on this application, we know what we are getting because I do sympathize with those neighbors. We Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 40 want to make sure that our commitment is met in putting the fire on us that we are not going to let you occupy that building until those improvements are not bonded are met. And that indeed will make sure that that type of stuff is built. Regarding the issue of height. The height is only 13 feet not 23 feet as indicated by one gentleman. The height is from the top of the wall, not to the top of the peak. That is a very, very important architectural element of this building. My client has indicated to me, he will not build a building — regarding the issues of hotels and motels and neighbors. I am going to submit to you a series of pictures. This is an extended stay that was built on Vista Avenue in Boise, Idaho. It is a two-story facility, but this facility is located directly in an urban residential neighborhood, directly in it. You can see directly behind it are homes. The type of buffer that we propose is not even remotely close to what you see in these photos. So I will leave that one with you. This is the Holiday Inn Express in the City of Boise and again I want you to look at the architectural differences between what my client proposes and how they build these facilities. But basically this application is directly in a residential neighborhood. They even actually share streets, and this request which was approved in the City of Boise for the AmeriSuites, all of these are residential uses surrounding this piece of property. Now, all be it they are not the acre lots subdivision, but they are all owner occupied townhouses, and this is an indication to you that a hotel or motel is not some evil, vile, 24-hour use that is going to have a dramatic impact upon a neighborhood. These types of things are done all over the country, and even with our particular area. I talked with Jim Pibbs of the Boise Police department; he is the gentleman you see on Television, regarding his opinion of a hotel and from the standpoint of crime. He says is not necessarily even of the radar screen. He says yes lower, lower, lower end in some bad neighborhoods there is some problems. He says alcohol, events with alcohol, and schools are much more dangerous than things like this. In fact, he said the most dangerous thing for a police officer is domestic violence in a single-family subdivision. He says it does not have anything to do with necessarily income. There are more problems with vandalism of cars and theft on residential streets than there are in hotel parking lots. So we believe that this application can be compatible, that we have met the standard, my client wants to be in Meridian, they want to be here, and I hope that you will see to it that we can. This is a very important location. Mr. Moore submitted a letter to you, and I do not know if you had the opportunity to read it, but he had been approached by three different motel operations. Winston Moore does not sell property. He develops income property. He knew the quality of this type of development and the importance, and he was willing to sell the property because he does not sell property. So with that I am sorry for taking your time, thank you very much, and I hope that you will support the project. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 47 Anderson: could I just ask one question. I have a little site map. could you show me what areas you are talking about, this berm and this fence, where you would build that and how far? Korte: The berm runs the entire distance of Magic View Properties ownership, so it would run from here to this location here. This is the one that was built in front of Fast Eddy's. The fence that we propose to build, the oft -vinyl would go from the western property line of Magic View all the way out to Eagle Road to this location here protecting the vision triangle that the Highway District requires at that corner. Anderson: And these trees that you are going to put? Korte: The 12 trees are graphically shown in this here. What I tried to do was place the trees before I had the fence in, so you can see a house here, a house here, and a house here. These are the houses that are closest to it, and one over here as well in here. Anderson: So would these trees basically be adjacent to your property? Korte: No, they would be on the berm. Anderson: Yes, on the berm adjacent to your property? Korte: correct. In a cluster fashion that is graphically shown here. And these were the conditions Mr. Mayor plus the one about the private occupancy that I did not write down. If you have any other questions, if not thank you very much. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would like to clarify something that was said with Mr. Childe. When did you buy your property? Did you buy it in September of 2000? Childe: Right. Bird: Is when you bought the property? Childe: correct. Bird: okay. Childe: That is all you wanted to clarify is when I bought it? Bird: Yes, I thought you said that was wrong when he was — r` Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 48 Childe: Well, he was indicating that I purchased the property knowing darn well of the signage — Bird: I just wanted to make sure that that was right for public record. childe: There is many issues with what has happened with Jackson's and so forth, that is not part of this issue, and it should not have been part of his discussion. Corrie: Any other questions that the council has? Bird: I have none. Corrie: If council does not have any questions — I will go ahead and — I will entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing. Bird: For both of them, Mayor? Corrie: Yes, this will be for both. we have had testimony for both of them. okay, this is the planning and real estate (inaudible). A note that is being put as part of the record. So if council did not have any other questions, does anybody on the public testimony? Anderson: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Hearing none, I will entertain a motion then to close the Public Hearing on Items 10 and 11. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we close the Public Hearing on the request for conditional Use Permit and for the Variance request for the height for the Ameritel Inn. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the Public Hearing on Items 10 and 11 on Ameritel conditional Use Permit and a height variance. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 49 Corrie: Discussion of council on the requests? Corrie: To get this started, let us do the conditional Use Permit first. Bird: Number 11 is first, right? Corrie: Number 1 1 . Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I guess I will just open up some discussion then with some of my comments. First of all, I think what has been said here tonight is compared to kind of a bomb being dropped on the neighborhood there, and I tend to agree with some of those statements. we all knew that Eagle Road was going to be a 4 -lane road, but we did not know that we were going to have all of this commercial development, but it kind of stood to reason. Now, that that is here I guess what we are trying to do is trying to make that compatible with the existing neighborhood and to make it work to make it fit in. The Council is very much aware of some of the ongoing problems and concerns of the neighborhood, and we are doing the best that we can as projects come forward to try and lessen the impacts of these developments. Things like the berming and the landscaping and even things like the credit Union. And looking at the hours of operation and how we are trying to shield the neighborhood, so we are trying to do all we can to buffer or to build a buffer in-between the neighborhood and all of this commercial development. That is not an easy task, and as we have tried to do this, when I first read the information on this project and as I have heard the testimony, my first thoughts were that this is a bad mix. That you should not put a three-story hotel next to a residential neighborhood. It just does not fit in, and like a lot of you there has to be other pieces of property in Meridian that this could be built on. As I kind of look at this a little bit more, I will say that the Ameritel Inns are probably one of the best quality of motels that are being built in Idaho today. In fact, I frequently stay in them in my travels, and by the way I love those chocolate chip cookies at about bpm for the guests when you come in. But having said that, am really concerned and we have had a number of issues that have come back before the council regarding buffering and landscaping, and I find it very interesting even just a couple of weeks ago we had another project that was back before us again, and the neighbors were asking for a little more quality and a little more upscale in the buffering and fencing. And the answer was no, and now all the sudden that we have a new project now we could come in and we could improve that. Now we could put a vinyl fence and we can do additional footage that two weeks ago we could not do. That really bothers me, and that concerns me that we are willing do some little things now to get a project approved. I think everything that Ameritel is trying to do in this are good things. I think the size of Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 50 the landscaping, the maturity of the landscaping, all of those things are excellent things to be trying to do, and I am having a real tough time with issue tonight because I know that the things that they are offering to do are probably going to make a big impact, and it is really going to buffer that neighborhood, and it is really going to improve the looks of that whole project area versus if we deny them. Like one gentleman stated, you can have a one-story motel that is not near this quality and not get any of that buffering or any of those improvements that I know the neighborhood would like to see, and I know the Council would like to see that just have not occurred. So I am still probably the guy that is right on the fence on this, I have been vacillating from no way should it go to this will make the improvements that we need to really help the neighborhood. I throw those comments out, and maybe the rest of the Council has some insight that I do not have, but I am in a dilemma on this one. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I agree with Councilman Anderson. I believe that this project is definitely a first class project. Ameritel Inns do a great job of building. I like the design. I like the buffer they are putting up, this will help the neighbors not only for this project for all projects back there. In our conditions, we can see that that happens, make sure that that happens. They have agreed to meet all of the conditions before they get an occupancy, so I think we can possibly control that part. I feel sorry for the residents, but I guess when you have a hospital and everything over there on Eagle, motels, and restaurants, offices are going to follow. You just hope that you can put in the best quality development that is possible. That is my opinion. De weerd: There is no question that this a first class project, and there is no question that this is something that would be very desirable in our community. You have done your homework. You have a tremendous project that you are presenting to this Council. The only thing I cannot forget is the commitments that we have made in prior agreements, and I believe that those commitments exist, and I do understand that if anything changed they needed to come back with a Conditional Use Permit, but the concerns last year were the same concerns today. Single -story, hours of operation, and traffic and this does not change any of that. So no matter how much I would like to see this happen, and no matter how much the applicant has gone beyond what I have ever seen an applicant do, stili have to say that this city made a commitment. They made a statement when they denied a previous application for a hotel on this site. This Council made a commitment to the neighbors when the passed and when the approved this particular development to begin with, and I have to stand by that agreement. Corrie: okay. I made my statement in the State of the City Address, and I am standing by that one. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 51 De Weerd: He already knows he cannot break a tie with three people. Corrie: Personally, i think it is an excellent hotel. l would like to see it somewhere else rather than right there, but I think that it would be a great asset to the City of Meridian in that general area. I have some doubts about what is being put there now, and what it could be committed in the Development Agreement earlier is not being followed, so my thoughts would be if they would like to put that in a little different spot, I would not have any problem with it. Like I said before, we are going to see a lot of things come down the pike for Meridian. We have a plan and we better stick with it, so that is where I am coming from. Again, you are absolutely right, 1 cannot break a tie tonight. Unfortunately, one of the Council people is sick with the flu, so you will have to make your decision with the three of you. I would not want someone to think it is a cop-out but it is not. I really think the hotel is good but in the wrong place. okay, with that being said anything that anybody would like, Council? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Let us bring it down where the rubber meets the rubble, and I will entertain a motion and we will see which way it goes. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: 1 move that we recommend denial of the Conditional Use Permit for a three-story 87 -room hotel in an L -o zone for the proposed Ameritel Inn and for the attorney to draw up the appropriate Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision of order. Corrie: okay, motion has been made to deny the Conditional Use Permit on the Ameritel Inn and that the Attorney to prepare Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law. Is there a second? Anderson: I will second it. Corrie: okay, motion has been made and seconded. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Discussion, Mr. Bird. Bird: If we deny this permit then the motion must include a statement of what it would take to get it approved. Corrie: I do not think the motion has to include that. There is confusion there. Meridian City council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 52 Bird: Discussion does then. At least discussion if not the motion. De Weerd: I think prior to my motion I put it in my discussion that I do not feel that this conforms to the intent of when we approved this original project, and no matter how bad I would like to see it go there, 1 just cannot in good conscience deny the commitments that were made then or the commitments made by previous councils by denying of a hotel there before. Bird: That does not say what it takes to get it approved. De Weerd: Well, I could not approve a hotel on that piece of property. Corrie: Does not necessarily have to a hotel either, does it? De Weerd: A 24-hour, three-story application, how is that? Corrie: Discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Mr. Anderson? Anderson: I will just add to it for Keith's benefit and for the applicant to clarify more. I think wrong piece of property for this motel. I think it is a beautiful motel, and it is just the wrong application. It is not what I would be looking for to do the buffering that I would like to see between this heavy commercial area I think it is going to be and the residential neighborhood. Corrie: Any other discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: okay, you have heard the motion of the denial of the conditional Use Permit. Mr. Clerk will you have a roll call vote, please. Rall -call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, absent; Bird, naye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: Two ayes and one naye. The vote is for denial of the Conditional Use Permit. The next is the variance. So Council I will need a motion for the request for variance on Item 10. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. F - 1. _ Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 53 Bird: I move that we deny the request for a variance to exceed maximum building height of 35 feet for Ameritel Inn by B & A Development. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to deny the variance on Ameritel Inn on Item 10. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I guess just a point of discussion for staff, I think they were correct to interpret this the way that they did because to me there was a lot of mechanical stuff in there and that was a room underneath there, and it was not just a parapet wall. I just wanted to pass that on to staff. Corrie: Any other comments? okay, roll call vote Mr. Clerk. Roll -call: De Weerd, aye; Anderson, aye; McCandless, absent; Bird, aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: Now as I mentioned at the first of the meeting, we want to get out of here and we are not going to make it with all of these Public Hearings. We are down to Item 13 now. Bird: Item 12 is the next one. Corrie: Item 12 is right, the Sundance subdivision and number 13, so council making that statement you have the opportunity either to continue until you want to quit or we still have to do 20, 21, 22,and 23 which are not Public Hearings. Bird: These Public Hearings have to be moved to April 3, 2001. Corrie: April 3, 2001. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: My thoughts on it are there are way to many Public Hearings on here and we will be here until 3am, and l would just as soon postpone the rest of the Public Hearings and skip down to Item 20 and finish the meeting. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 54 Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: According to the council over here we need to do it separately. Item 12. Public Hearing: AZ -00-021 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 70.72 acres to R-8 for proposed Sundance Subdivision by G.L Voigt Development — northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads: Corrie: With that I will open the Public Hearing on Item 12 a request for annexation and zoning of 70.72 acres to R-8 for proposed Sundance Subdivision by G.L. Voigt, northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we continue the Public Hearing for the annexation and zoning of 70.72 acres to R-8 for proposed Sundance Subdivision by G.L. Voigt Development, northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing until April 3, 2001 on Item No. AZ 00-021 request for annexation and zoning. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 13. Public Hearing: PP -00-020 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 214 single-family lots, 4 future office lots and 23 common lots on 00.70 acres for proposed Sundance Subdivision by G.L. Voigt Development — northeast corner of Ustick and Meridian Roads: Corrie: I will open the Public Hearing and entertain a motion for the continuance. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we continue the Public Hearing for Sundance Subdivision Preliminary Plat No. 00-020. Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 55 De Weerd: To what date, Ron? Anderson: To April 3, 2001. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing on Item PP 00-020 request for Preliminary Plat on Item 13 to April 3, 2001. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT De Weerd: Mr. Mayor, before we clear the room with all of these continuances. We apologize, but we just have to do this. Corrie: These will come down the same way. They will be first and they go right down the line. So these will be right at the very top and 0:30pm. Item 14. Public Hearing: AZ 00-027 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 5.97 acres from RT to R-4 by Hubble Engineering for proposed Inglenook Subdivision — east side of Locust Grove Road and north of Victory Road: Corrie: I will open the Public Hearing and entertain a motion for continuance. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we continue to April 3, 2001 AZ 00-027, request for annexation and Zoning of 5.97 acres from RT to R-4 by Hubble Engineering for propose Inglenook Subdivision. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion has been seconded to continue the Public Hearing on Item 14. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 15. Public Hearing: PP 00-028 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 21 building lots and 3 other lots on 5.97 acres in a proposed R-4 zone by Hubble Engineering for proposed Inglenook Subdivision — east side of Locust Grove Road and north of Victory Road: Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 55 Corrie: I will open the Public Hearing at this point and entertain a motion for continuance. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I make a motion we continue the Public Hearing for a request for a Preliminary Plat approval for Inglenook subdivision until April 3, 2001. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing on Item 15, Inglenook Subdivision. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 16. Public Hearing: CUP 01-001 Request for a conditional Use Permit for an office building for O'Neill Homes in an L -O zone by Toothman-Orton Engineering company 1 Johnson Design --- Franklin Road and Locust Grove Road at 385 South Locust Grove Road: Corrie: I will open the Public Hearing on Item 16, request for Conditional Use Permit No. 01-001 O'Neill Homes at this point and entertain a motion for continuance. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we continue to April 3, 2001 request for Conditional Use Permit for an office building by O'Neill Homes in an L -O zone by Toothman-Orton Engineering Company/Johnson Design, Franklin Road and Locust Grove. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing on Item 16 for O'Neill Homes. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Excuse me Mr. Mayor if this is a Public Hearing can I address the Council? .r Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 57 Bird: No it is closed. We continued it. Corrie: We are continuing it. Item 17. Public Hearing: AZ 01-00'1 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 78 acres from R-1 to C -C and C -G by Larson Architects for proposed Silverstone Corporate Center — southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road: Corrie: I will open the Public Hearing and entertain a motion for continuance. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we continue request for annexation and zoning of 78 acres from R-1 to C -C and C -G by Larson Architects for proposed Silverstone corporate center to April 3, 2001. Corrie: Motion is made. Do I hear a second? Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing on Item 17 request for annexation and Zoning of Silverstone Corporation center. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 18. Public Hearing: PP 01-001 Request for Preliminary Plat approval of 15 building lots and 1 other lot on 78 acres in proposed C -C and C -G Zones for proposed Silverstone corporate Center by Larson Architects southeast corner of overland Road and Eagle Road: Corrie: I will open the Public Hearing and entertain a motion for continuance of the Public Hearing. Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I would make a motion that we continue the Public Hearing for a request for Preliminary Plat for Silverstone corporate Center until April 3, 2001. Bird: Second. L Meridian City Council Meetingr March 20, 2001 Page 58 Corrie: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 19. Public Hearing: CUP 01-002 Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a commercial planned unit development and floodway approval in proposed C -C and C -G zones for proposed Silverstone Corporate Center by Larson Architects — southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road: Corrie: I will open the Public Hearing and entertain a motion for continuance. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we continue the request for Conditional Use Permit for a commercial planned unit development and floodway approval in proposed C -C and C -G zones for proposed Silverstone Corporate Center by Larson Architects until April 3, 2001. Corrie: I have a motion. Do I hear a second? Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to continue the Public Hearing on Item 19 a Conditional Use Permit for Silverstone Corporate Center until April 3, 2001. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: At this point Council, I would that through the City Clerk we make sure that we have that list ahead of time as much as possible. Because I would like to if we have to come earlier to get these done this time. What I am trying to say is if we have to go at 5:30 p.m, we might have to do that. To make sure we get these at that point. If the Council agrees. Bird: I agree with you Mayor. Because we probably have that many waiting on the agenda for that night. Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I just had a comment about that. I think, whoever is putting this together, I mean I looked at this morning and said there is no way you are going to be able to fit in a presentation from COMPASS and an Executive Session in 30 minutes. It is just ridiculous if you cannot plan better than that. And then I think if the staff reports or the Department reports are going to last that Meridian city Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 59 long. We did not start this meeting until 8 p.m when we got to the first agenda item, then we have to move them back to the back. We have to speed that up so that we can get through some of the agenda. Bird: I agree with you, but we keep shoving these down. And now you have some that have already been noticed and scheduled for April 3, 2001, and we have just shot 9 more Public Hearings onto that. what is the Mayor supposed to do when he puts the agenda on? It is already set. I thought going to one extra meeting would take care of it, but it has not because we keep continue it because we wait to find out if we have a -- *** End of Side Four *** Bird: -- you know they have sat here since 6:30pm until 10:20pm thinking that they were going to get a Public Hearing. Anderson: Well, those people did not. They came back in late. The missed the Mayor's announcement when he announced at the start that we would not go past 10. Corrie: We are going to continue as long as we have this growth in Meridian. We are going to have this continually. We have to do the best we can with it. So maybe we are going to have to start at noon to get everything done, but we are playing it by ear right now. It is going to get rougher. Nichols: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Nichols. Nichols: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council I think because we have announced that these things are continued, and now people know that the meeting starts at 6:30pm instead of 7:30 like it used to. You have already added an extra hour onto your meetings, essentially. And I would also point out that because it is a Public Hearing maybe you can start the meeting earlier, but figure on you better hit the first Public Hearing at 6:30pm because that is when the folks are going to be here. if you try to do it at Spm or try to do it at 5:30pm, you may miss somebody that shows up at 6:30pm when they heard it was going to be continued. So if in the future we are looking at speeding up a meeting or starting it earlier in the evening then we should say that in the motion that the continuation is on that date at that time so that we do not have some problem with somebody showing up after that particular matter has already been heard. Item 20. FP 01-003: Request for Final Plat approval of 31 building lots, 1 other lot, and 1 city lot on 8.04 acres in an R-4 zone for Tumble Creek Subdivision No. 6 by Pinnacle Engineers, Inc — south of Ustick Road, east of Linder Road: Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2601 Page 60 Corrie: Staff comments on that one? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council, staff has not prepared Final Plat comments on this project. It is the 0th phase of a project out at Linder and Ustick known as Tumble Creek Subdivision. They were the subject of a previous application that you heard for a variance for reducing the lot frontage on 4 lots to about 78ft. 1 know you know you do not want to pass on something without our comments, but we would ask that consider approving this with our standard Final Plat approval comments, similar to the ones that were presented for Tumble Creek Subdivision No. 5. Corrie: I guess my question is why do we not have the staff's comments? Stiles: We have not had any time to prepare them. Corrie: Then I will entertain a motion to table this. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we table this request for Final Plat of 31 building lots and one other lot by Tumble Creek Subdivision by Pinnacle Engineers until we get the staff reports. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Staff are you going to get the report by April 3, 2001? Because we have set a date. Bird: We do not have to set a date on that. Corrie: We do not have to, but Bird: How about the 17th, April 17, 2001. Stiles: We could by the 17th. That would at least give them some time to respond if they had any objections to our comments. Bird: With the second's approval, I would move the tabling until April 17, 2001. De Weerd: I have no problem with it. I will not be here on the 17th. Corrie: The motion has been made to table until April 17, 2001 on Item 20. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. r' Meridian City Council Meeting March 26, 2661 Page 61 MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 21. FP 01-004: Request for Final Plat approval of 48 building lots and 5 other lots on 10,19 acres in an R-8 zone for Wilkins Ranch Village Subdivision by Steiner Development, LLC — east of North Black Cat and south of West Ustick: Corrie: Staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council we did not prepare staff comments on this application. We did not even make an attempt to you because the property is not annexed and the Development Agreement has not been signed. Table it until next year for all I care. Corrie: How did it get on here, Mr. clerk? Berg: Mr. Mayor, no I cannot. Shari may have a little bit more of why it was on the agenda. I do not know. Did we get an application? I do not know why. Stiles: I did not realize that we had been having some problems with some of the annexations. We have got some annexations out there that have been approved, the Development Agreements have been prepared, sent out to the applicant, but the Development Agreements have never been returned. And an Ordinance annexing the property has never been passed by the City council. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Bird: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move we table this until April 17, 2001. Corrie: Do I hear a second to table this? Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to table Item 21 until April 17, 2001. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye, MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 22, Time Extension: Request for Time Extension for recording and signing of Final Plat of Pintail Pointe Subdivision originally approved June 20, 2000 — south side of cherry Lane, east of Black Cat Road: �' r f •y Meridian City Council Meeting f March Zo, 2001 Page 62 Corrie: Staff, why do they need extension? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council Jeff Manship who had owned this property is in the process of trying sell it. Just another point on this subdivision, they are requesting that the lots shown in this location be split into another lot so that this can be a drainage area, and it would make this lot roughly almost exactly 8000 square feet, slightly over 8000 square feet. At least it is my opinion that that is a change that should have to go back through the Public Hearing process. I do not know if Cary has any opinion on it, and in talking to the potential buyer today, the reason given for making it an above ground drainage pond instead of an underground is that it would cost $20,000. 1 guess it would be my recommendation that if the plat is extended it be only for this plat and not for a change and addition of a drainage lot. Corrie: Cary, any comments? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council I have had a couple discussions. One with the engineer for the project, J.J. Howard and the other discussion was with the representative from the Highway District, Gary I nselman. We talked about this drainage pond. The engineer has told me and the Highway District has told me that the reason for the change was because they were not able to make the design work with the elevation of the groundwater out there that they had originally submitted. And that was to put infiltration trench under the sidewalk within the right-of-way, and they do not have enough vertical distance between the bottom of the trench and the groundwater in order to make that work and meet the Highway District requirements. Now why that was not determined in the beginning when they designed the project, I do not know. The Highway District is saying that they will not accept it the way it is designed. that they have to go to a drainage pond. So the question before Shari and I is then they want to split that lot that has block 2 showing in it on the screen into two lots. The southerly about 37ft of dimension would be the drainage lot. The northerly portion of that lot approximately 8,050 square feet would be the building lot. our concern is that this thing went through a Public Hearing and it was presented in this configuration in the Public Hearing for public comment. If we put a drainage lot in there and a drainage pond with the development that is going on next door, English Gardens Subdivision, it is our concern that that property owner could come back and say, you guys changed this plat. How come you did that? What was the reason for that? I do not know legally speaking where we are, and Shari has already expressed her concerns and her desires. From an engineering standpoint, it is a change for engineering purpose, but that is the background have on it. Corrie: Thank you, Gary. Mr. Bird. f Meridian city council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 63 Bird: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we allow this time extension for the recording and signing of the Final Plat at Pintail Pointe Subdivision but off of the original plat, no changes. It is only the original plat as specified. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to extend request for time extension and recording and the signing of the Final Plat on the Pintail Pointe Subdivision only off of the original plat. De Weerd: So that would be extension to what date? Corrie: Until June 20, 2001. Am I correct? Stiles: 2002. Corrie: 2002, it was supposed to be 2000. Bird: It was supposed to be 2000. Corrie: No, you are right, 2002. Any further discussion? Anderson: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Anderson. Anderson: I do not know, but I guess based off of what I heard Shari and Gary say, it does not seem to me like we ought to grant an extension that we let it expire and let them go back to square one and re -do this thing almost because it sounds like there is problems with this current plat. I do not know why we would just extend that. De Weerd: Since the deadline is not up already, huh? Anderson: Am I off base, what are we doing by extending it a year? we are not solving anything, are we? Corrie: If they have to do it off of the original plat, they are not going to be able to do anything. De Weerd: Is this something that ACHD asked them to change? Smith: Yes, it is my understanding. Stiles: Are you sure it is? Have they put it in writing? Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 55 Corrie: item 23 then is a time extension — Stiles: They vivant a time extension, and they have not even signed a Development Agreement yet, so... They are trying to market the property without making any commitments themselves. Bird: Was it supposed to be on the agenda tonight? Stiles: We told Shelby to take it off. Bird: Well it is off then. Corrie: Alright back to this. This is to inform you in writing, if you choose to, have the right to a predetermined hearing at 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday, March 20, 2001, before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person to be judged on the facts and to defend the claim made by this City that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel. This service will be discontinued on March 21, 2001, unless payment is received in full. Is there anyone present who wishes to contest his or her water, sewer and trash delinquency? Hearing none, you are hereby informed that you may appeal or have this decision of the City reviewed by the 4th Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho State Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off. The amount of the turn off list is $347148.49. Smith: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Yes Gary. Smith: May I make a comment or ask a question? Corrie: You certainly may. Smith: The water Superintendent called me today and said that they have 570 turn offs on the list, and their staff can accommodate 250-270 in one day. So he asked the question, do we want to carry this over for 2 days? Corrie: We pretty much have to. Smith: I do not know that we have any choice. Corrie: We do not have a choice, and however gets the second day will just get an extra day. Smith: Because we typically list this turn off day as one day, I do not know whether you need to make that adjustment in your motion. Meridian City Council Meeting [ March 20, 2001 Page 64 Smith: Mr. Mayor and Members of Council it was my understanding in talking to Cary Enselman at ACHD that that is the case that the design that they offered on this existing plat will not work the way they have it designed and that they are going to have to have a drainage lot. So what Councilman Anderson is saying is correct. The plat is not going to work the way it was submitted, and it is a situation where there apparently was not enough engineering work done at the time the storm -drainage system was designed even though we require them to locate groundwater elevation so they can design this stuff so that it will work and it will comply. Corrie: with that in mind I would entertain a substitute motion. De Weerd: I would withdraw my second. Corrie: Alright, second has been withdrawn. Bird: I will withdraw my motion. Corrie: okay, motion has been withdrawn. I will entertain another motion. Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I would make a motion that we deny the time extension. Bird: Second. Corrie: okay, Motion made and seconded to deny the time extension on Item 22. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Item 23. Water, Sewer and Trash Delinquencies: Corrie: That is to inform you in writing if you choose to have the right Bird: Mr. Mayor I have an Item 23. 1 am looking all over to find out where Item 23 is on the agenda. Anderson: It is not on the agenda, but we got it in our packets. It is another time extension. Corrie: Oh, well I got a revised one as of 3-19-2001, 1 guess I did not get the right one. De Weerd: They still got a packet for it. That was the confusion. Anderson: Which one? f F Meridian City Council Meeting ,t March 20, 2001 Page 66 Corrie: Yes, we will. Smith: okay, thank you. Corrie: So whoever wants to make the motion needs to make the adjustment in the motion that the turn off day will the 215t or the 22nd depending upon how many they get to that day. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I would love to make the motion, but I have one question first. Who in February decided to resend the Council's order as far as turning off delinquent bills? There was no turn off in February I was told. Corrie: Oh, we did not have the list is what I understood. Bird: I have the list and we passed it. Anderson: We did not have the list in our packet. Bird: Yes we did. I have the February list and we past it. It was a week later. Corrie: Something happened in the computers or something, we could not turn them off because we did not — it was lost somewhere along the line. Smith: I am sorry. I cannot recall. Bird: That is okay. I also have one other question. Why is an owner of a property not notified when the account goes into bankruptcy or gets way -- we are talking about $0,000-$8,000 behind? When is our policy to notify the owners of the property? If the renter leaves, he is responsible, so we have his name. Smith: The owner can make arrangements with the billing system whereby the bills are sent to the renter for payment, and ultimately of course as you say, Councilman Bird, the owner of the property is ultimately responsible for the bill, but there is a paper that is signed, a form that is signed by the property owner, that allows MUBs to sent the billing to the renter for payment. otherwise the billing is sent to the owner for payment. So as far as 1 know there are only two alternates for that. Bird: With that Mayor I would move that we approve the delinquency turn off to be done on 3-21-01 and 3-22-01 and for the sum of $34,148.40. Anderson: Second. Meridian City council Meeting March 20, 2001 Page 67 Corrie: Motion made and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Corrie: I will find out what that was. There is something to it, but I cannot remember what it was. There was a foul up somewhere. De Weerd: Just two quick things. I want to know how we are progressing with this Mill Levy thing. Are we going to hold a public meeting, what are we doing? Nichols: Mayor and members of the council, Mr. Berg and I were talking about that today and he has been working with the County clerk on the issue on the issue of precincts and ballots and that, and he can speak to that. De Weerd: I do not care about that. I am just more concerned about selling this to the public. Nichols: Well, Councilwoman de Weerd my point is that you have to have those items done in order to pass your resolution which calls for the election. Bird: What is your other short item? De Weerd: Just to see if the Mayor was told that we wanting a meeting set with the Ada county? Corrie: Yes, and we are getting it just as fast as we can. We have it on line already, but they said they would do it as soon as they get all three of them together? Anderson: Are suppose to get our census numbers this week? Corrie: I heard that and I heard it from COMPASS and I think the clerk is getting it this week. Anderson: I just it would be really helpful because I saw those numbers Janice has pulled together for this Mill Levy, and if we had those current numbers before we started putting any information that would be helpful. Corrie: As soon as I get them you will have them in your box, if you want me to call you I will do that too. I aim to please. De Weerd: I move that we adjourn. Bird: Second. Meridian City Council Meeting k, March 20, 2001 Page 68 Corrie: Motion made and seconded. All in favor? MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:50 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: r ROB RT D. CORRIE, MAYOR ATTEST: of BEAL, Fwl LLIAM G. BERG, JR., IT Y LERK ► "' Ito i ADA COUNTY RE"ORDER 1 11 AV ,100IhR21 PH 12 9 CITY of MERIDLkN CORDED - ftLQUE;"S TO F­ MERIUM Gif V FE aENuT K 0o1025l�8 ORDINANCE NO. aloow'?114C AN ORDINANCE FINDING THAT CERTAIN LAND TO BE KNOWN AS OBSERVATION POINT SUBDIVISION LIES CONTIGUOUS OR ADJACENT TO THE CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO; AND FINDING THAT THE OWNER HAS MADE A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION IN WRITING TO THE COUNCIL; AND THAT SAID LAND BE ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AND ZONING DESIGNATED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (R-4); AND DECLARING THAT SAID LAND, BY PROPER LEGAL DESCRIPTION AS DESCRIBED BELOW, BE A PART OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO; REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS, ORDERS OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; AND DIRECTING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ADD SAID PROPERTY TO THE OFFICIAL MAPS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO; AND DIRECTING THE CLERIC OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN TO FILE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDINANCE AND MAP OF THE AREAS TO BE ANNEXED WITH ADA COUNTY RECORDER, AUDITOR, TREASURERAND ASSESSOR, AND THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, PURSUANT TO IDAHO CODE SECTION 50-223 AND SECTION 63-2215. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF ADA, STATE OF IDAHO: SECTION 1. FINDINGS: That the following described land is contiguous and adjacent to the City of Meridian, Idaho, and that the City of Meridian has received a written request for annexation to the City of Meridian, Idaho, by the owner of said. Property to -wit: A parcel of land being the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 19, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ -00-010) - 1 Commencing at the southeast corner of the SW 1/4 (south 1/4 corner) of Section 19, T. 3N.7 R. lE., B.M., the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; Thence S 89°42'45" W 1,320 43 feet to the southwest corner of the SE 114 of the SW 114; Thence N 0'29'39" E 1,329.84 feet to the northwest corner of the SE 114 of the SW 114; Thence N 89°44'30" E 1,322.27 feet to the northeast corner of the SE 114 of the SW 114; Thence S 0'34'26" W 1,329.19 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; Said parcel of land contains 40.33 acres more or less. SECTION 2: That the above-described real property be, and the same is hereby annexed and made a part of the City of Meridian, Ada Counter, Idaho. SECTION 3: That the real property herein by this ordinance annexed to the City of Meridian hereinabove described shall be zoned Low Density Residential District SECTION 4: That the City Engineer is hereby directed to alter all use and area maps as well as the official zoning maps, comprehensive plan and all official maps depicting the boundaries of the City of Meridian in accordance with this ordinance. SECTION 5: The zoning designation set forth in Section 3 of this ordinance is subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Development Agreement by and between the City of Meridian and the owner of the land described in Section 1 dated the day of M , and that the uses are to be developed under the single-family residential subdivision development process and conditional use permit process. ANNEXAT I GN AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ -00-010) - 2 SECTION 6: All ordinances, resolutions, orders or parts thereof in conflict herewith are hereby repealed, rescinded and annulled. SECTION 7: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage, approval and publication, according to law. SECTION 8: The Clerk- of the City of Meridian shall, within ten (10) days following the effective date of this ordinance, duly file a certified copy of this ordinance and a map prepared in a draftsman manner plainly and clearly designating the boundaries of the City of Meridian, including the lands herein annexed, with the following officials of the Counter of Ada, State of Idaho, to -wit: the Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor and shall also file simultaneously a certified copy of this ordinance and map with the State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho, all in compliance with Idaho Code §63-2215 and §50- 223. ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ -00-010) - 3 PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this G� day of , 2001. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this .627'% day of &61CA2 , 2001. r L MA oR r ATTE S t CITY CLERIC - STATE OF IDAHO,) Ito ss. ' County of Ada. } On this ! QO% day of � , 2001, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared ROBERT D. CORRIE and WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk of the CITY of Meridian, Idaho, and who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. .4�"#'OTAk Nz��o d�i o (SEAL) o NOTARY PU IC OR IDAHO • Q RESIDING T. a - -'00MY COMMISSION EXPIRES. — -00 MSG1Z:\Work\History\M`Meridian\Victory 41 AZ PP VAR\AZOrd ANNEXATION AND ZONING ORDINANCE (AZ -00-010) - 4 F,:�- . fr. Fr _ .... �. - f CERTIFICATION OF THE CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To: The Recorder, Auditor, Treasurer and Assessor of Ada County, and The State Tax Commission of the State of Idaho I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk, of the City of Meridian, Ada County, State of Idaho, do hereby certify that the attached copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Meridian, on the day of 2001, is a true and correct copy of the original of said document which is in the care, custody and control of the City Clerlc of the City of Meridian. Cf 10 A �� Z LLIAM G. BERG, JR. STATE OF IDA��� County of Ada, On this _�;`` day of 6VtqCR..j , in the year 2001, before me, � " V/M MA "' vt , a Notary Public, appeared WILL G. ERG, JR., known or identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian. SEAL) �.� ,.`•, �� Notary Pu i' r Id o © o Commission Ex CA � 40 ms 1Z:1Work\Histo Alb 4 AZ PP VAR CertificationofClerkord tr�acao� CERTIFICATION of THE CITY CLERK of THE CITY of MERIDIAN AZ -00-010 4 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) BIG D. BUILDERS, OWNERS AND TREASURE) VALLEY ENGINEERS, APPLICANT, FORA ) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OFFICE) WAREHOUSE IN A KNOWN FLOOD PLAIN ) IN THE I -L ZONE LOCATED AT 299 N. ) BALTIC PLACE, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) C/C 03-06-01 CASE NO. CUP -00-057 ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT This matter coming before the City Council on the 20" day of February, 2001, and tabled until March 6, 2001, under the provisions of Meridian City Code § 11-17-4 for final action on conditional use permit application and the Council having received and approving the Recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission the Council takes the following action: 1. That the Applicant of the property is granted a conditional use permit for an office/warehouse in a known flood plain in the I -L zone, the proposed application request of a conditional use permit for the construction, development, maintenance and use for an office/warehouse, as described in the "SITE LAYOUT FOR BIC- "D" BUILDERS, MERIDIAN BUSINESS PARI-, TILE: NEW SITE FOR BIC- "D" BUILDERS, NO. A, BY: ALS, DATE: 12/01l00, REV. A, DESIGNED BY: ALS, DRAWN BY: JTL, CDEDICED BY: ALS, SKEET C1 OF 3, DRAWING # 1274-007 BY: TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS, BIG "D" BUILDERS, Developer, for the development of the aforementioned warehouse and which property description is on file in the City Clerk's office. 2. That the above named applicant is granted a conditional use permit for an office/warehouse, located at 299 N. Baltic Place, Meridian, Idaho Meridian, Idaho, subject to the following conditions of use and development: ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BIG D. BUILDES-OWNERS /TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS APPLICANT , OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PAGE 1 OF 7 ORDERCUP057 Adopt the Recommendations of Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: 2.1 The sewer and water systems shall be floodproofed and approved by the Idaho Department of Water Resources and Federal Emergency Management Agency as per Idaho Code §§ 46-1022 and 46-1023. An engineer shall certify that the floodproofing requirement has been fulfilled as per Ordinance 11-11-3 .A.3. 2.2 Ordinance 11-11-3.A.2 requires that no structure shall be erected unless the main floor is placed a minimum of 1 foot above the elevation of the 100 -year floodplain. The elevation of the floodplain on-site is 2611 ft. No finished floor elevation is shown on the submitted plans. The applicant shall verify that the floor elevation of the structure meets this requirement. 2.3 Materials that are buoyant, flammable, noxious, toxic or otherwise potentially injurious if transported by floodwaters are prohibited as per Ordinance 11-11-5. Storage of any materials or equipment not having these characteristics is permissible only if they have low damage potential and are anchored or are readily removable from the area. 2.4 Conditions that may be required by the Commission [and Council] per Ordinance 11-11-4 in approving structures in a Floodplain Overlay Zone through the Conditional Use Process include: a. Limitations on periods of use and operation; b. Imposition of deed restrictions; C. • Location and arrangement of structures within the floodway and floodway fringe areas to avoid an increase in flood heights during the recurrence of the 100 -year flood discharge; d. Requirement for construction of channel modifications, dikes, levees and other protective measures; e. Placement of survey benchmarks; and f. Additional floodproofing measures. ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BIG D. BUILDES-OWNERS /TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS -APPLICANT , OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PAGE 2 OF 7 ORDERCUP05 7 2.5 According to Ordinance 11-11-6, the evaluation of the effect of the proposed use causing an increase in flood heights is based not just on the effect of the single use acting alone, but upon the reasonable assumption that other landowners within the floodplain may need to be allowed to develop to an equivalent extent within the floodplain. Therefore, the accumulative effects of all such encroachments shall be considered by the Commission (and Council) in malting any decision. Allowing additional development shall increase the floodplain elevation in the area, but not more than the required 1 -foot safety margin. No portion of the proposed development is within the floodway. 2.6 A11 signage is subject to design review and requires separate permits. No freestanding signs are proposed with this application. If any are proposed in the future, it shall conform to the new Sign Ordinance, as recommended for approval by the Meridian City Council on November 21. This allows for a single freestanding sign not to exceed 70 square feet and 15 feet high, maximum. 2.7 Dimensions of all parking stalls shall conform to minimum dimensions as per city ordinance and ADA. City ordinance requires 9 X 19 standard stalls and 25 -foot -wide minimum driveways. ADA requires the van -accessible handicap -accessible stall to have a striped aisle separate from the stall (typically an 8 -foot stall and an 8 -foot aisle). The handicap parking space shall have van -accessible signage per ADA standards. 2.8 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). A bid shall accompany any request for Temporary Occupancy. 2.9 Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. 2.10 In accordance with City Ordinance 12-13-8-1, underground year-round pressurized irrigation shall be provided to all landscape areas on site. Applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BIG D. BUILDES-OWNERS /TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS -APPLICANT , OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PAGE 3 OF 7 ORDERCUP057 for the primary source. If City water is proposed as a secondary source, developer shall be responsible to pay water assessments for the landscaped areas. Applicant shall submit irrigation performance specifications in compliance with Ordinance 12-13-8-2 when applying for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 2.11 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-13 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in above site-specific requirements. 2.12 Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-13-4.D. and 11-13-4.E. of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 2.13 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer per City Ordinance 11-13-4.B.4 for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 2.14 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-13-4.C. 2.15 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Sections 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells shall be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.16 A11 irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2.17 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Landscape Ordinance 12-13. ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BIG D. BUILDES-OWNERS /TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS -APPLICANT , OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PAGE 4 OF 7 ORDERCUP057 2.18 All trash and/or garbage collection areas shall be enclosed on at least three (3) sides in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-12-1.C. Coordinate trash enclosure locations and construction requirements with Sanitary Service Company (SSC) and provide a letter of approval from SSC to the Planning &. Zoning Department when applying for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 2.19 Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 12-5-2.K. 2.20 All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. 2.21 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Planning and Zoning Commission further recommends: 2.22 The applicant shall provide a landscape plan that includes landscaping on the south wall from the west end of the sidewalk to the east corner of the building. 2.23 The applicant is not required to landscape on the east boundary of the lot. 2.24 Landscaping on the north side shall commence at the west end and extend all the way across the north property line, except within 5 feet of the building which will consist of a sidewalk. Adopt the Recommendations of the Central District Health Department as follows: 2.25 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2.26 Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality; or The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BIG D. BUILDES-OWNERS /TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS APPLICANT , OFFICE/WAREHOUSE PAGE 5 OF 7 ORDERCUP057 groundwater and surface water degradation. In the event a practice other than a grassy swale is used, Applicant shall submit detailed plans and a complete Operations And Maintenance Manual to the Director of Public Worlcs for review and approval. Adopt the Recommendations of the Ada County Highway District as follows: 2.27 The proposed northern driveway shall be relocated approximately 52 - feet to the south to align with East King Street. 2.28 The southern driveway shall be as proposed on the site plan. 2.29 The driveways shall be paved their full -required with to a point 30 -feet beyond the edge of pavement of Baltic Place. 2.30 If the new improvements are damaged during construction, the application shall be responsible for replacing the damaged curb, gutter and/or sidewalk on Baltic Street with new curb, gutter and/or sidewalk to match existing improvements. 2.31 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. 3. The above conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application for a conditional use permit. 4. Notice to Permit Holder, this conditional use permit is not transferable without complying with the provisions of Meridian City Code § 11-17-8, a copy of which is attached to this permit. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the �-'�%(J , 2001. 4 b y I 2�L_ - Robert D. Corrie, Mayor City of Meridian ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BIG D. BUILDES-OWNERS /TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS -APPLICANT , OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ORDERCUP05 7 day of PAGE 6OF7 Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. BDated: ity Clerk ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BIG D. BUILDES-OWNERS /TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS -APPLICANT , OFFICE/WAREHOUSE ORDERCUP057 PAGE 7OF7 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN OFFICE/ WAREHOUSE IN A ICNOWN FLOOD PLAIN IN THE I -L ZONE LOCATED AT 299 N. BALTIC PLACE, MERIDLNN, IDAHO BIO D BUILDERS, OWNERS. TREASURE VALLEY ENGINEERS, APPLICANT. C/C 03-06-01 CASE NO. CUP -00-057 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDI'T'IONAL USE PERMIT The above entitled conditional use permit application having come before the City Council on February 20, 2001, and tabled until March 6, 2001, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., at Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, appeared and testified, and appearing and testifying on behalf of the Applicant was Dennis Durant, and no one appeared in opposition, and the City Council having duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter and the Recommendations to City Council issued by the Planning and Zoning Commission who conducted a public hearing and the Council having heard and taken oral and written testimony, and having duly considered the matter, the City Council hereby makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order to -wit: FINDINGS OF FACT Big D. Builders -Owners Treasure Valley Builders -Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain - TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 1 of 19 1. A notice of a public hearing on the conditional use permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearing scheduled for February 201 2001, and tabled until March 6, 2001, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more than fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing and with the notice of public hearing having been posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing and the copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations as public service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the City Council at the February 20, 2001, and tabled until March 6, 2001, public hearing; and the applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code §67-6509, 6512, and Meridian City Code §§ 11-15-5 and 11-17- S as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. This proposed development request is in an I -L zone, by reason of the provisions of the Meridian City Code § 11-17-4, a public hearing was required before the City Council on this application. 4. The property is located at 299 N. Baltic Place, Meridian, Idaho. 5. The owner of record of the subject property is Big D. Builders, Inc. of Nampa, Idaho. 6. Applicant is Treasure Valley Engineers, Inc., of Nampa, Idaho. 7. The subject property is currently zoned I -L. The zoning district of I -L is Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — Page 2 of 18 7. The subject property is currently zoned I -L. The zoning district of I -L is defined within the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 8. The proposed application requests a conditional use permit for an office - warehouse in a known flood plain. The I -L zoning designation within the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance requires a conditional use permit be obtained for most uses including those requested by the Applicant. (Meridian City Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 11-8-1). 9. The Meridian City Council recognizes that the proposed application is in compliance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 10. The use proposed within the subject application will in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City ordinance. 11. The Meridian City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivision and Development Ordinances codified at Titles 11 and 12, Meridian City Code and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and Maps and the Ordinance establishing the Impact .Area Boundary. 12. Giving due consideration to the comment received from the governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the following conditions of development are imposed and the following is also found to be required to mitigate the effects of the proposed use and development upon services delivered by political subdivisions providing services to the subject real property within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian: Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/'Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 3 of 19 Adopt the Recommendations of Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: 12.1 The sewer and water systems shall be floodproofed and approved by the Idaho Department of Water Resources and Federal Emergency Management Agency as per Idaho Code §§ 46-1022 and 46-1023. An engineer shall certify that the floodproofing requirement has been fulfilled as per Ordinance 11-11-3.A.3 . 12.2 Ordinance 11-11-3 .A.2 requires that no structure shall be erected unless the main floor is placed a minimum of 1 foot above the elevation of the 100 -year floodplain. The elevation of the floodplain on-site is 2611 ft. No finished floor elevation is shown on the submitted plans. The applicant shall verify that the floor elevation of the structure meets this requirement. 12.3 Materials that are buoyant, flammable, noxious, toxic or otherwise potentially injurious if transported by floodwaters are prohibited as per Ordinance 11-11-5. Storage of any materials or equipment not having these characteristics is permissible only if they have low damage potential and are anchored or are readily removable from the area. 12.4 Conditions that may be required by the Commission [and Council] per Ordinance 11-11-4 in approving structures in a Floodplain Overlay Zone through the Conditional Use Process include: a. Limitations on periods of use and operation; b. Imposition of deed restrictions; C. Location and arrangement of structures within the floodway and floodway fringe areas to avoid an increase in flood heights during the recurrence of the 100 -year flood discharge; d. Requirement for construction of channel modifications, dikes, levees and other protective measures; e. Placement of survey benchmarks; and f. Additional floodproofing measures. 12.5 According to Ordinance 11-11-6, the evaluation of the effect of the proposed use causing an increase in flood heights is based not just on the effect of the single use acting alone, but upon the reasonable assumption that other landowners within the floodplain may need to be Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 4 of 19 allowed to develop to an equivalent extent within the floodplain. Therefore, the accumulative effects of all such encroachments shall be considered by the Commission (and Council) in malting any decision. Allowing additional development shall increase the floodplain elevation in the area, but not more than the required 1 -foot safety margin. No portion of the proposed development is within the floodway. 12.6 All signage is subject to design review and requires separate permits. No freestanding signs are proposed with this application. If any are proposed in the future, it shall conform to the new Sign Ordinance, as recommended for approval by the Meridian City Council on November 21. This allows for a single freestanding sign not to exceed 70 square feet and 15 feet high, maximum. 12.7 Dimensions of all parking stalls shall conform to minimum dimensions as per city ordinance and ADA. City ordinance requires 9 X 19 standard stalls and 25 -foot -wide minimum driveways. ADA requires the van -accessible handicap -accessible stall to have a striped aisle separate from the stall (typically an 8 -foot stall and an 8 -foot aisle). The handicap parking space shall have van -accessible signage per ADA standards. 12.8 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). Abid shall accompany any request for Temporary Occupancy. 12.9 Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. 12.10 In accordance with City Ordinance 12-13-8-1, underground year-round pressurized irrigation shall be provided to all landscape areas on site. Applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If City water is proposed as a secondary source, developer shall be responsible to pay water assessments for the landscaped areas. Applicant shall submit irrigation performance Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF . do c Page 5 of 19 specifications in compliance with Ordinance 12-13-8-2 when applying for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 12.11 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-13 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in above site-specific requirements. 12.12 Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-13-4.D. and 11-13-4.E. of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 12.13 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer per City Ordinance 11-13-4.B.4 for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 12.14 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-13-4.C. 12.15 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Sections 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells shall be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 12.16 A11 irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 12.17 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Landscape Ordinance 12-13. 12.18 All trash and/or garbage collection areas shall be enclosed on at least three (3) sides in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-12-1.C. Coordinate trash enclosure locations and construction requirements with Sanitary Service Company (SSC) and provide a letter of approval Big D. Builders,— Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 6 of 19 from SSC to the Planning &. Zoning Department when applying for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 12.19 Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City ordinance Section 12-5-2.K. 12.20 A11 signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. 12.21 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Planning and Zoning Commission further recommends: 12.22 The applicant shall provide a landscape plan that includes landscaping on the south wall from the west end of the sidewalk to the east corner of the building. 12.23 The applicant is not required to landscape on the east boundary of the lot. 12.24 Landscaping on the north side shall commence at the west end and extend all the way across the north property line, except within S feet of the building which will consist of a sidewalk. Adopt the Recommendations of the Central District Health Department as follows: 12.25 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 12.26 Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality; or The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. In the event a practice other than a grassy swale is used, Applicant shall submit detailed plans and a complete Operations And Maintenance Manual to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 7 of 19 Adopt the Recommendations of the Ada County Highway District as follows: 12.27 The proposed northern driveway shall be relocated approximately 52 - feet to the south to align with East Ding Street. 12.28 The southern driveway shall be as proposed on the site plan. 12.29 The driveways shall be paved their full -required with to a point 30 -feet beyond the edge of pavement of Baltic Place. 12.30 If the new improvements are damaged during construction, the application shall be responsible for replacing the damaged curb, gutter and/or sidewalk on Baltic Street with new curb, gutter and/or sidewalk to match existing improvements. 12.31 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. 13. The proposed uses within the subject application will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan and the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance because: 13.1 The subject property is designated on the "Generalized Land Use Map" as "Existing Urban". 14. The uses proposed within the subject application subject to the conditions herein ordered will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance or intended character of the general vicinity and that such uses will not change the intended essential character of the same area. 15. The uses proposed within the subject application will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses. Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 8 of 19 16. The uses proposed within the subject application will be served adequately by central public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, and sewer. 17. The uses proposed within the subject application will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 18. The development will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of natural or scenic feature of major importance relating to the property. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian shall exercise the powers conferred upon it by the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975" hereinafter referred to for convenience as the "Act" codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code (I.C. §67-6503). 2. The Meridian City Council may exercise all the powers required and authorized under the "Act" except the power to adopt ordinances by the establishment of a Planning and Zoning Commission by ordinance pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6504 which the City Council of the City of Meridian has established by the passage of the "City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance" at Titles XI and XII, Chapter I, Meridian City Code. 3. As part of a zoning ordinance the City Council can, subject to hearing and notice provision required, provide for the process of special and/or conditional use permits which a proposed use is otherwise prohibited by the terms of the ordinance but allowed with conditions under the specific provisions of the ordinance which the City of Median has done in the adoption of its zoni ring ordinances. Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 9 of 19 4. The City Council has the duty and responsibility to review the facts and circumstances of each application for special use permit to determine prior to granting the same that the evidential showing supports the finding that the following standards are met and that the proposed development: (Meridian City Code § 11-17- 3) a. Will in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City policy; b. Will be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance; C. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; d. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; e. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide adequately any such services; f. Will not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community; g. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors; h. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 5. Prior to granting a conditional use permit in an Limited Office District Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 10 of 19 (L-0), a public hearing shall be conducted with notice to be published and provided to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred feet (300') of the external boundaries of the land under consideration for the conditional use permit all in accordance with the provisions of Meridian City Code § 11-17-5 City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, which provides as follows: "Prior to approving a Conditional Use Permit, the applicant and the Commission and Council shall follow notice and hearing procedures provided in Chapter 15 of this Title. Provided, however, that conditional use applications for land in Old Town and in industrial and commercial districts shall only be required to have one public hearing which shall be held before the Planning and Zoning Commission; and after the recommendation of the Commission is made, the application shall go before the City Council without a public hearing and the Council may approve, deny, or modify the recommendation of the Commission." 6. Following the public hearing and within 45 days after the conclusion of the public hearing the Commission shall, transmit its recommendations to the Meridian City Council with supportive reasons. The Commission shall recommend that the application be approved, approved with conditions or denied. The Commission shall ensure that any approval or approval with conditions of an application shall be in accordance with Meridian Comprehensive Plan, City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, and Idaho State law. (Meridian City Code § 11-17-6) 7. When the City Council approves a conditional use permit it may impose conditions of that approval that reasonably: A. Minimize adverse impact on other development; B. Control the sequence and timing of development; Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7 FF . d o c Page 11 of 19 C. Control the duration of development; D. Assure that the development is maintained property; E. Designate the exact location and nature of the development; F. Require the provision for on-site public facilities or services; and G. Require more restrictive standards than those generally required, in this Ordinance. 8. The City of Meridian has, by ordinance, established the Impact Area and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, which was adopted December 217 1993, Ord. 629, January 4, 1994 and Maps. DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT To CONDITIONS NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby ORDER and this does order that: 1. That the above named applicant is granted a conditional use permit for an office/warehouse in a known flood plain, subject to the following conditions of use and development: Adopt the Recommendations of Planning and Zoning and Engineering staff as follows: 1.1 The sewer and water systems shall be floodproofed and approved by the Idaho Department of Water Resources and Federal Emergency Management Agency as per Idaho Code §§ 46-1022 and 46-1023. An engineer shall certify that the floodproofing requirement has been fulfilled as per Ordinance 11-11-3.A.3. 1.2 Ordinance 11-11-3 .A.2 requires that no structure shall be erected unless the main floor is placed a minimum of 1 foot above the elevation of the 100 -year floodplain. The elevation of the floodplain on-site is 2611 ft. No finished floor elevation is shown on the submitted plans. The Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 12 of 19 applicant shall verify that the floor elevation of the structure meets this requirement. 1.3 Materials that are buoyant, flammable, noxious, toxic or otherwise potentially injurious if transported by floodwaters are prohibited as per Ordinance 11-11-5 . Storage of any materials or equipment not having these characteristics is permissible only if they have low damage potential and are anchored or are readily removable from the area. 1.4 Conditions that may be required by the Commission [and Council] per Ordinance 11-11-4 in approving structures in a Floodplain Overlay Zone through the Conditional Use Process include: a. Limitations on periods of use and operation; b. Imposition of deed restrictions; C. Location and arrangement of structures within the floodway and floodway fringe areas to avoid an increase in flood heights during the recurrence of the 100 -year flood discharge; d. Requirement for construction of channel modifications, dikes, levees and other protective measures; e. Placement of survey benchmarks; and f. Additional floodproofing measures. 1.5 According to Ordinance 11-11-6, the evaluation of the effect of the proposed use causing an increase in flood heights is based not just on the effect of the single use acting alone, but upon the reasonable assumption that other landowners within the floodplain may need to be allowed to develop to an equivalent extent within the floodplain. Therefore, the accumulative effects of all such encroachments shall be considered by the Commission (and Council) in making any decision. Allowing additional development shall increase the floodplain elevation in the area, but not more than the required 1 -foot safety margin. No portion of the proposed development is within the floodway. 1.6 All signage is subject to design review and requires separate permits. No freestanding signs are proposed with this application. If any are proposed in the future, it shall conform to the new Sign Ordinance, as recommended for approval by the Meridian City Council on November Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 13 of 19 21. This allows for a single freestanding sign not to exceed 70 square feet and 15 feet high, maximum. 1.7 Dimensions of all parking stalls shall conform to minimum dimensions as per city ordinance and ADA. City ordinance requires 9 X 19 standard stalls and 25 -foot -wide minimum driveways. ADA requires the van -accessible handicap -accessible stall to have a striped aisle separate from the stall (typically an 8 -foot stall and an 8 -foot aisle). The handicap parking space shall have van -accessible signage per ADA standards. 1.8 All required improvements must be complete prior to obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. A Temporary Certificate of Occupancy shall be obtained by providing surety to the City in the form of a letter of credit or cash in the amount of 110% of the cost of the required improvements (including paving, striping, landscaping, and irrigation). Abid shall accompany any request for Temporary Occupancy. 1.9 Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. 1.10 In accordance with City Ordinance 12-13-8-1, underground year-round pressurized irrigation shall be provided to all landscape areas on site. Applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If City water is proposed as a secondary source, developer shall be responsible to pay water assessments for the landscaped areas. Applicant shall submit irrigation performance specifications in compliance with Ordinance 12-13-8-2 when applying for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 1.11 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-13 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in above site-specific requirements. 1.12 Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-13-4.D. and 11-13-4.E. of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Big D. Builders -Owners Treasure Valley Builders -Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain - TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 14 of 19 1. 13 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer per City Ordinance 11-13-4.B.4 for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 15 of 19 1. 14 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as to not direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-13-4.C. 1.15 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project shall be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Sections 9-1-4 and 9-4-8. Wells shall be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 1.16 All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the parcel shall be tiled per City Ordinance 12-4-13. ,Plans shall be approved by the appropriate irrigation drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 1.17 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Landscape Ordinance 12-13. 1.18 All trash and/or garbage collection areas shall be enclosed on at least three (3) sides in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-12-1.C. Coordinate trash enclosure locations and construction requirements with Sanitary Service Company (SSC) and provide a letter of approval from SSC to the Planning &. Zoning Department when applying for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 1.19 Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 12-5-2.K. 1.20 All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-14 of the City Zoning and Development Ordinance. 1.21 All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Planning and Zoning Commission further recommends: 1.22 The applicant shall provide a landscape plan that includes landscaping on the south wall from the west end of the sidewalk to the east corner of the building. Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 16 of 19 1.23 The applicant is not required to landscape on the east boundary of the lot. 1.24 Landscaping on the north side shall commence at the west end and extend all the way across the north property line, except within 5 feet of the building which will consist of a sidewalk. Adopt the Recommendations of the Central District Health Department as follows: 1.25 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 1.26 Stormwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality; or The Engineers and architects involved with the design of the subject project shall obtain current best management practices for stormwater disposal and design a stormwater management system that prevents groundwater and surface water degradation. In the event a practice other than a grassy swale is used, Applicant shall submit detailed plans and a complete Operations And Maintenance Manual to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. Adopt the Recommendations of the Ada County Highway District as follows: 1.27 The proposed northern driveway shall be relocated approximately 52 - feet to the south to align with East Ding Street. 1.28 The southern driveway shall be as proposed on the site plan. 1.29 The driveways shall be paved their full -required with to a point 30 -feet beyond the edge of pavement of Baltic Place. 1.30 If the new improvements are damaged during construction, the application shall be responsible for replacing the damaged curb, gutter and/or sidewalk on Baltic Street with new curb, gutter and/or sidewalk to match existing improvements. Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc Page 17 of 19 1.31 Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. 2. The conditions shall be reviewable by the Council pursuant to Meridian City Code § 11-17-9. 3. The above conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application for a conditional use permit. 4. That the City Attorney draft an Order Granting Conditional Use Permit in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Cleric and then a copy served by the Cleric upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requesting notice. NOTICE of FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. day of By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the / &9't� .2001. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7FF. doc VOTED VOTED64�� Page 18 of 19 COUNCILWOMAN TAMMY deWEERD COUNCILWOMAN CHERIE McCANDLESS r VOTED VOTED MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED DATED: MOTION: APPROVEDA& DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and the City Attorney. : QDated: City Clerk ����������� . 6S SEAL i Sy Big D. Builders —Owners Treasure Valley Builders —Applicant Office/Warehouse In Flood Plain — TreasureValEngCUP05 7 FF . d o c Page 19 of 19 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 118.4 ACRES FOR SPRINGDALE SUBDIVISION, LOCATED AT 2256 n. MC DERMOTT ROAD MERIDIAN, IDAHO BY: GEMSTAR PROPERTIES , LLC APPLICANT. C/C 03/06/01 Case No. AZ -00-022 FINDINGS of FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER of DENIAL The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing on March 6, 2001, at the hour of 6:30 o'clock p.m., Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, appeared and testified, and appearing and testifying on behalf of the Applicant was: Susan Wildwood, and those testifying in favor of the project were: Dale Ownby, and including letters read by Dale Ownby from Monte Janicek and Dale Janicek, Jan Cheever, Roland Rice, and Jack C. Anderson, and appearing and testifying with comments and/or concerns were: Meridian School District, Donna Anderson and Scott Stanfield, and the City Council Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law and Order Denying Annexation and Zoning By: Gemstar Properties, LLC for proposed Springdale Subdivision — AZ -00-022 Page 1 of 6 having duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter therefore makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The notice of public hearing on the application for annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearing scheduled for March 6, 2001, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been mailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred (300') feet of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more than fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing and with the notice of public hearing having been posted upon the property under consideration more than one week before said hearing; and that copies of all notices were made available to newspaper, radio and television stations as public service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the City Council at the March 6, 2001, public hearing; and the applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code §§ 67-6509 and 67-6511, and §§11-2-416E and 11-2-417A, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 3. The City Council takes judicial notice of its zoning, subdivisions and development ordinances codified at Title 11, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, and all current zoning maps thereof, and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629, January 4,1994, and maps and the ordinance Establishing the Impact Area Boundary. Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law and Order Denying Annexation and Zoning By: Gemstar Properties, LLC for proposed Springdale Subdivision — AZ -00-022 Page 2 of 6 4. The property is approximately 118.4 acres in size and is located at 2256 N. McDermott Road. The property is designated as Springdale Subdivision. 5. The owners of record of the subject property are Monte and Lela Janicek, of Meridian, Idaho. 6. Applicant is Gemstar Properties, LLC, of Eagle, Idaho. 7. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as RT, and consists of agricultural uses. 8. The Applicant requests the property be zoned as R-4 Low Density Residential. 9. The property which is the subject of this application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 10. The entire parcel of the property is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 11. The Applicant proposes to develop the subject property in the following manner: a 385 single-family lot (9 common lots) subdivision. 12. The Applicant requests zoning of the subject real property as R-4 which is consistent with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which designates the subject property as Single Family Residential. 13. There are no significant or scenic features of major importance that affect the consideration of this application. CONCLUSIONS of LAW 1. The City of Meridian has authority to annex real property upon written request for annexation and the real property being contiguous or adjacent to city boundaries and that said property lies within the area of city impact as provided by Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law and Order Denying Annexation and Zoning By: Gemstar Properties, LLC for proposed Springdale Subdivision — AZ -00-022 Page 3 of 6 Idaho Code Section 50-222. The Municipal Code of the City of Meridian Section 11- 2-417 provides the City may annex real property that is within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as set forth in the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2. The City Council may take judicial notice of government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within the City and State. 3. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority and responsibility as provided by "Focal Land Use Planning .Act of 1975', codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code by the adoption of `Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ord. No. 629, January 4, 1994. 4. That in § 11-2-417 A it provides in part that: "If the Commission and Council approve an annexation request, the Commission and Council shall insure that said annexation is in accord with this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. " S. Idaho Code § 67-6511(c) provides in matters where the City Council is considering a zoning designation application as follows: "If the request is found by the governing board to be in conflict with the adopted plan, or would result in demonstrable adverse impacts upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services, including school districts, within the planning jurisdiction, the governing board may require the request to be submitted to the planning or planning and zoning commission or, in absence of a commission, the governing board may consider an amendment to the comprehensive plan pursuant to the notice and hearing procedures provided in section 67-6509, Idaho Code. After the plan has been amended, the zoning ordinance may then be considered for amendment pursuant to section 67-6511(b), Idaho Code." 6. Idaho Code § 67-6512 (a) provides the authority to grant special and/or conditional use permits" ....when it is not in conflict with the plan." [referring to the Comprehensive Plan.] Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law and Order Denying Annexation and Zoning By: Gemstar Properties, LLC for proposed Springdale Subdivision — AZ -00-022 Page 4 of 6 7. The City's authority to make and enforce ordinances are confined to within the City's boundaries as provided in Article XII § 2 of the Constitution of the State of Idaho. 8. The provisions of I.C. § 50-222 govern the conditions upon which the Citymea r exercise its authority to annex territory, but the exercise of that authority is discretionary as determined by the City Council. DECISION AND ORDER NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE .ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, the City Council does hereby order and this does order: 1) That the application for annexation is denied because it would open up a whole new area to development at a time which would impair the City's ability to deliver basic services in the area and to other parts of the City. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the denial of the annexation and zoning may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 20#%_ day of GviL� , 2001. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN RON .ANDERSON VOTED Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law and Order Denying Annexation and Zoning By: Gemstar Properties, LLC for proposed Springdale Subdivision — AZ -00-022 Page 5 of 6 COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD COUNCILWONLA,N TAMMY deW EERD COUNCILWOMAN CHERIE MC CANDLES S MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED__ VOTED eye� VOTED VOTED DATED: MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and the City Attorney. By: ���-- /'�'� Dated: City Clerk 11NPANTS40—PDCISERVER ZMork1M\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\Springdale Sub A.Z022 PP0221AZFfCl&.OrderDenyingAZ.doc Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law and Order Denying Annexation and Zoning By: Gemstar Properties, LLC for proposed Springdale Subdivision — AZ -00-022 Page 6 of 6 SIM— BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY" OF MERIDIAN IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUEST FOR PRELIMIN.A.RY PLAT FOR SPRINGDALE SUBDIVISION FOR A 385 SINGLE FAMILY LOT (PLUS 9 COMMON LOTS) ON 118.4 ACRES, LOCATED EAST OF MC DERMOTT BETWEEN CHERRY LANE AND USTICK ROAD, MERIDIAN, IDAHO GEMSTAR PROPERTIES, LLC APPLICANT. C/C 03-06-01 Case No. PP -00-022 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on March 6, 2001, at the hour of 6:30 p.m., at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, and the City Council takes judicial notice of its action of the denial of the application for annexation and zoning in Case No. AZ -00- 022, and the City Council based upon its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order in Case No. AZ -00-022, does hereby deny the application for preliminary plat approval. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP -00-022) SPRINGDALE SUBDIVISION PAGE 1 OF 3 FINDINGS of FACT 1. It is found that the Recommendations to City Council of the Planning and Zoning Commission is not reasonable, nor appropriate, for the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat due to the denial of the annexation and zoning in Case No. AZ -00-022. DECISION AND ORDER Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Meridian City Code Section 12-3-5, and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND THIS DOES ORDER, that based upon the denial of the annexation and zoning in Case No. AZ -00-022, the Council does hereby deny the application for preliminary plat approval. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the 20"�— day of 2001. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD COUNCILWOMAN TAMMY deWEERD COUNCILWOMAN CHERIE McCANDLES S VOTED�.� VOTED ��- VOTED&Je� VOTED adf e`� MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED �— FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP -00-022) SPRINGDALE SUBDIVISION PAGE 2 OF 3 t MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. ov By: /1011 � 9Dated: City Clerlc ANPA NTS40-PDCISERVER Z\Work\"eridianlMeridian 153 b0M\Springdale Sub AZ022 P P02 21PP02 2 D eni a l F FCl0 rder. d o c FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP -00-022) SPRINGDALE SUBDIVISION PAGE 3 of 3 ,ECEIVED MAR 2 8 -2001 Cfty of meridian interoffice City Clerk Office MEMORANDUM ...... ..... .. . ..... ...... . To: William G. Berg, Jr., Ci erk From: Wm. F. Nichols Subject: -.PINTAIL POINTE SUBDIVISION 1 BY: KELLY HUNEMILLER Date: March 28, 2001 Please find enclosed the original of the ORDER DENYING A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR FILING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, in the above matter. This ORDER is pursuant pursuant to the City Council's action at its March 20, 2001, meeting. Therefore, please present this ORDER to Mayor Corrie to obtain his signature. Please forward copies to the Applicant, Planning and Zoning, Public Works and the City Attorney. If you have any questions please advise. Z:1Work\MlMeridianl1\4eridian I5360NITPintailPointe TE DenailUimeExtClerk.doc BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL. IN THE MATTER OF THE ) APPLICATION FOR FINAL ) PLAT FOR PINTAIL POINTE ) SUBDIVISION ORIGINALLY) APPROVED JUNE 207 20007 ) LOCATED SOUTH OF ) CHERRY LANE AND EAST ) OF BLACK CAT ROAD, ) MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) BY: FELLY HLTNEMILLER ) CIC 3-20-01 ORDER DENYING A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR FILING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN This matter coming on regularly before the City Council on the March 20, 2001, upon the Applicant's time application for a one (1) year extension within which to submit the Final Development Plan as provided in § 11-9-604 F 2., and the time application was denied with good cause appearing: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND THIS DOES ORDER THAT: The above named Applicant is denied a one (1) year emended period of time within which to submit the Final Development Plan for the above entitled subdivision application. ORDER DENYING A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION -PAGE 1 OF 2 FOR FILING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN By action of the City Council at its regular meeting on the March 20, 2001. n DATED this LW — day of Malt CAUe- , 2001. Le �� r MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE Copy served upon .Applicant, Planning and .Zoning Department, Public Works Department and City Attorney. By' CITY CLERIC Dated: y___ Z:1Wor1c,\N4\Meridian\N4eridian 15360WintailPointe TE Denail\TimeExtensiononeYndoc ORDER DENYING A ONE (1) YEAR TIME EXTENSION -PAGE 20F 2 FOR FILING THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN .. 4 ; } �jy1 SEALs - BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL ) OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING ) A.DMINISTRA.TOR'S INTERPRETATION) OF THE DEFINITION OF "FLASHING ) SIGN" FOR A TO Z RENTAL SL SUPPLY) SIGN 1 BY: A TO Z RENTAL ) C/C 02-06-01 ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVERRULING PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION AND ORDER OF RENLAND This matter coming before the City Council on February 6, 2001, at the hour of 6:30 o'clock p.m., at the Meridian City lull, 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, upon the appeal of A to Z Rental &.Supply, and the Council having received the Appeal Application form, and the record in this matter, and having heard the arguments and presentation of Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, and Toby Williamson, the Applicant, and being fully advised in the premises issues the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Toby Williamson submitted for approval, to the Planning and Zoning Administrator, an application for a new sign for A to Z Rental St Supply which includes a computerized electronic reader board, similar to the signs at Meridian ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVER -RULING OF PLANNING -PAGE 1 OF S AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION AND ORDER of REMAND (By: A to Z Rental - AP -0 1-001) High School, the Meridian Public Library, and the Idaho Independent Bank, located in a Community Business C -C} zone at 1603 East 1st Street, Meridian, Idaho. 2. The Planning and Zoning Administrator's office denied the application for a new sign for A to Z Rental &, Supply which includes a computerized electronic reader board at 1 603 East Ft Street, Meridian, Idaho, upon the basis that electronic reader boards, within the existing sign ordinance, are classified as "flashing lights"or containing the potential to flash lights, which are prohibited by Ordinance 11-14- 3.G. Therefore, to be consistent with previous applications for electronic reader boards, and the interpretation of Ordinance 11-14-3.G., the application was denied. Additionally, the Planning and Zoning Administrator informed the Applicant that the proposed sign without a reader board would be acceptable. Prior to submitting the sign application, the Applicant's sign company sale representative was informed that an amendment to the sign ordinance was pending before the City Council, and that the ordinance amendment prohibits electronic reader boards in the C -C zone. The proposed sign ordinance allows electronic reader boards up to 20% of the sign background area, but only in the C -G and I -L zones. They are prohibited in the C -C zone. 3. Toby Williamson timely filed an appeal of the Administrator's determination and decision for hearing before the City Council. ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVER -RULING OF PLANNING -PAGE 2 OF S AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION AND ORDER of REMAND (By: A to Z Rental - AP -0 1 -00 1) 4. The sign, which will be used for the electronic reader board for A to Z Rental &. Supply, includes a computerized electronic reader board, and will scroll and switch to time and temperature, but will not flash, and it conforms to the maximum height requirement. The sign is intended to enhance the looks of A to Z Rental SL Supply, to provide promotional information, time and temperature updates, and provide a conduit for local public service announcements. 5. Subject to the conditions of Finding no. 4, herein, the proposed use of a computerized reader board sign will not have "flashing lights" and is not a prohibited sign, and therefore, the decision of the Administrator of denial is over -ruled. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian has duly enacted the following ordinance provisions regulating signs as follows: 1.1 The activities and types of signs shall be expressly prohibited in all districts except as otherwise provided by Ordinance. 1.2 Flashing lights or strobe lights of any color. 2. The City ordinances provide at Meridian City Code § 11-3-4 for an appeal, hearing and review by the City Council of an order, requirement, decision, interpretation or determination by the Planning and Zoning Administrator. ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVER -RULING OF PLANNING —PAGE 3 OF S AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION AND ORDER of REMAND (By: A to Z Rental - AP -0 1 -00 1) DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVERRULING PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR A COMPUTERIZED ELECTRONIC READER BOARD AT 1603 EAST 1sT STREET, MERIDIAN, IDAHO OF TOBY WILLIAMSON AND ORDER OF REMAND Based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND THIS DOES ORDER THAT: 1. The decision of the Planning and Zoning Administrator of denial of the computerized reader board sign is based upon the grounds that electronic reader boards, within the existing sign ordinance, are classified as "flashing lights "or containing the potential to flash lights, which are prohibited by Ordinance 11-14- 3.G. Ordinance 11-14-3.G., state as follows: 11-14-3 PROHIBITED SIGNS: G. Flashing lights or strobe lights of any color. 2. This matter is remanded to the Planning and Zoning Administrator for further action in accordance with this decision. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which maybe adversely affected by the denial of the appeal may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVER -RULING OF PLANNING -PAGE 4 OF 5 AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION AND ORDER of REMAND (By: A to Z Rental - AP -0 1-001) order seek a Judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of 2001. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN ANDERSON COUNCILMAN BIRD COUNCILWOMAN deWEERD COUNCILWOMAN McCANDLESS MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) DATED: VOTED__ VOTED__ VOTED__ VOTED VOTED MOTION: APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, Public Works Department and the City Attorney. Dated: City Clerk msg/Z:\WorlclM\Meridian\Meridian 15360M\A Z Rental Appeal of P &. Z1ORDERGrantingAppealGver-RulingPZDeni alFlashingsign.wpd ORDER GRANTING APPEAL, OVER -RULING OF PLANNING -PAGE 5 OF 5 AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DENIAL OF APPLICATION AND ORDER of REMAND (By: A to Z Rental - AP -0 1 -00 1) March 16, 2001 CUP O1-002 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 20, 2001 APPLICANT Larson Architects ITEM NO. 19 REQUEST Public Hearing -CUP for a commercial PUD and floodway approval in proposed C -C and C -G zones for proposed Silverstone Corporate Center - SEC of Overland and Eagle Roads AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: See P & I Item Packet CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: A,1 NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the city of Meridian. UVoILL VR l)lvYqxsRx% Awry Zoxisrq e01AMMSioN IN 19,J -M MATT Eli OF I�fL No. oY-oati 1{,L�hUU'i FOIL ) COsI''DI'ftOsI'AI, TO (PEIIMIT rOIi A eoT414RUrAL lk LI�I;I`��'D r� MAR 16 2001 AppLIC4 T) b X. 'ate properly is Locvted �t the southe9st corner (4 Overlmd �,ovd 2nd R2g4e �,o2d, merldipt), ldvbo. 2. the owner (4 record of the subject property is sundmee Tnmestments Limited ��r�nership ot xerldi,�n, Idaho. 3. Applimt is owner of record. 4. 'the subject properly is currently zoned Ifowevar, there is vn appliedion betore the My Couneg dor �nnemtion end zoning to C -C 2nd C -q. 'the zontDg dMrids of C -C end C -q ire domed wzthb-) the City of XeridlvD ZoDh)g vnd `)vetopTj)eDt Ordhowe, Udio-D 5. the proposed 2ppti3eA101D requests 2 eondition2ti use permit dor 2 planned eommerei2ti development. 'The 04,�' end C -q zonfng design2tions vvXhfn the city ot Xeridi2n honing 2nd lJWoXXEJrvA'ftoX To eiT7 eovNeiv - 2 eoxvMoav-AL On IviMIT — Svsrvsrrn Uvv%STstFxfz -ListiTu)— $izv-&TLSToavR eoWPoFLATL e���. ��rr�r�v eoststsaeqL t)velopmeDt ordfDvDce -require � eoDdItIoD�l use permit be obtfted for Tjaost uses ID&dfn , those requested by ate Apptiie2nt. (`Meridien City honing end Ordinanee, lection 6. the end Zonin� commission reeogni�es th2t the proposed vpptiieWon is in comptii�nce Wuh the Xeri6n Compreherasism 'PI�n. Z. Ae use proposed wiUra ate subject �pptiieAion wild 3n tvet, eonsMuW v condiaonA use is determined by City. fpotiiey. �,�co�t�t�rrv�.�tosr 7. Ae Meridian V-�DD!Dg end honing Commission hereby recommends to the City Cotmeg of the City ot `Mepidi2n th2t Otey �pprove the conditiowti use permit �s requested by the IppIT=t, subject to the �ouowing: toaows: Adopt the aeeommendoMons ot the V.�=!Dg Pnd honing stP5 end Enft)ecrmg sug vs 7. 'ibis Coraditioniti t9se Permit is tor the cvl:�rvU concept end mixture ot uses. Mgn1t1evnt eh�nges to the plpD vs proposed wM require modMievt%ra ot ate CUl). Rgbt modMeWons thvt comptiy with the overvU devetiopment plan �pprov�C will nod requfre future public beprLt)P. 2. 'PIvnned `Dvetiopmerat As v mixed/plvnned use development, the Mverstorae Corpor�te Nnter mush comply with the tollowing sections ot ate su�di�ision ordfwnee: 72-6-� �"rocedures dor �'I�nned 'De�etiopmen�s, 7.2-6-6 �e-Denql I�egul�tions dor VPDDed `b�elopment, end 7.2-6-'l �,enerati �tand�rds dor �I�nned 'Dwetiopments. a eommereiA end office uses must eomptiy with 12-6-9-B, 'Design Wnd2rds dor Pivnned ate Vanning end Zonir)g Commission further recommends th2t .9 eonditionati use permit be Pequired it the apptiieant proposes I bar. 3. bite Pti2n: 'the copy ot the slngle-story buitiding mister plm submitted with the 2pptiie2tion does nod �ppe" to be to 2n �eeur2te se�le. `Det2ged review ot the site plan ��eo�tm��rrv�.�osr -fo elrffiY eoUsreiv - 3 eoNvrTtoav-Av vSR I)ETMIT — sysrvf+srn WV-&S-fX&VfS z,1XI-mv 1)ATfxR1jsyttj) — mvrmls-foxg eowpoTw-fR e&YNT1 I)LANNEI) eostXR11exA1, 1)Rv%Lo1yrt 46 is nod possibtie; only the eoraeept is dieing reviewed. `Det,�iled site pins thA meed �a perking lob dimensYowti end Imdse�ping sund"ds per City Ordinmee voile need to be reviewed end �Ppproved during the WWing permit process. �. Open $pvee: ALL Vained `Dvelopmerats (�) ire regtured to hie �t lost 7199 or the dross tipnd "o or the TI'D �s common open spvce per City OrdiDmee Uction 12 -6 -7- F, -5. 26 -Z - F, -5. Ae totvti CommoD open spice McutiWon dor Vverstone Corpor�te Center is nod shown. Apptiievnt shvU provide evticulwons showingl2ow this minimum eriteri� is mei. bite City's vveU tion wiU Dot be considered dor Inetiusion in this requirement it reimbursement is sought dor tete v2tiue or the property. 5. (Pgrkmg Lot 1,mdsc2ping: I,vndsc�pe istimds serving P singe row or p"king sh4 hie one free. Isl,mds serving 2 doublerow OF p"king shptiti hie two trees. A pl,mtmg isf-�nd sh�U be prodded to brevk up the vsph& eery 72 eonnnuous stvUs. tae site PI -9D submitted does not meed this requirement, tae det,o-ged Imdsme plan £or the Mverstone 'Poimt buiyding is Pt P sc�Le end meets or exceeds 4 I4ndsming requirements. AU site plans tivviU be rviewed �t the bugd'n)g permit suge to ensure eomptiianee -with the Meridim I,vndse�pe Ordin2nee. W£T -review OF the cvervU site plan is gentmL ontiy, end speciqe review voile occur upon �ppIieWon dor WIdIDg permits. �. R -reefs and Cireu tlon: Ae proposed project is desi ed Ps P stmd--AoDe developweDt with Do provisIoD, tar vecess to other properties. Z. Mgn�ge: ARhough signage loeptions ire raoted on the pLn, no detpgs ot proposed sigr»ge voepe mcLuded. AppLicmt WILL be responsiRe ror proposing 2 sign ppognm dor the entire dvetiopment vs p"t ot the eondition�l use process. 8. trisb Enclosures: Very dew t-mh enclosures ire shown on the Conceptu21 Me Apptiimt sh�U coopdinvte loevtions end construction requiremenU OF the required trvsh enclosures with Meridim smn-iry Unioe, Inc., end provide � Letter or vpprmt tom their ogee when 2pptiying dor v CertMie-ite or Zonwg Complivnee. J. AltenAive -frmsporWion OptIons: At build -out, this site WILL sere Vs � prTneipPti center or emptioyt»ent dor the "e2. tiVhile Boise Urb9n Wges does not eu"ently service Overti2nd I�o�d, it has the potenti2ti to be 2 tiikeLy destination poimt torrnm tmsit b-) the tuture. Ae V,.iDDfDg end Zonb-�g Commission strong4y recommends m mv be design2ted end/or preserved on the Concept PlPn tor v tuture bus shop. jn7e 2lso recommend the inclusion or bieyete rveks vt �U ogee end retvil buildings. ��eo�t�F,xv��tosr To eiT4Y eovsreiv - 4 eosrvi-ftoXA1, vSI& �-ElIM1T - SvsrvAsrn 1xnSTM&VfS vlstlfm) �ATjfxmjSM - $IzAr&UToXL eoWPoTiATL e&VfRFL I?ULrrN&v eoMMLILeLAL vU%voI?MEXf 10. All conditions plgced on this ppl4cvlon shvU run vvita tae I nd end sh4 not I�pse or be w&ed �s the result ot my ehmg�e h� tewney or ownership ot my or 40t the Inds governed by this WP PppUcvtYon. A such eonditions sh�ll be deemed the requirements 'dor the issu-Mce ot � Certiqe�te ot Oeeup-Incy dor any use or structure �s per city Ordmmee. 7Y. After pevlE:VO by the Adi COL[llty Ylarwffy `DIstPiet, vpplie�nt shall FoUervo ACY`D Pequirements_ Adopt the ot the Centr�ti `bistrzet yloti�a `Dep"Ument �s rotitiows: 72. Ae ApptiimA's eeratr�ti sewage n)d cernrvti w�ier ptivns mush be submined to end �pproved by the Idaho `Department ot YeAth & tiVeM2re, 'Division ot �rrxriironmen��l c�u�lity. 13. am -05 is nod to "e2te � mosquito breeding problem. 74. UormWger shva be prere2ted th-vou�h v Posy swvtie prior to discharge to the to prevent imp�d to grotrndvo�ter end surt2ee vo2ter quptiity. 15. Ae Rn91neers 2nd orehiteets invotived with the clestgn of the subject project shou oWm current best mmPgenaent pr�ctiees dor stormw2ter dispos2ti end design v aormw�ter mvwgement system th�t prevents groundwiter end su-v9ee vrvtfT degrvd-nion. Adopt the ot the `Iteridivn dire `Dep"Gtnent n rollrYws: 76. A codes relxing to ttre hydrnits end dire sprmktier systems sh4 be mei. ey/���Na���`�`N�exid�n�`I►�erldi�r� 153�b`I+�L�Frecammenda�a�CC7�4�2�i�ver�vr�evvpd eif'Y eoUNeiv - 5 �OaV'`llI'�IIO�V"�!L USE 'PEIimI`f — $Ux'bANCE Ixns'f%[ENfS LI%IITE'll— ��,v����o� eo1LV)1JA-M eoMMETieIAt, vw&vourf February 9, 2001 CUP 01-002 MERIDIAN PLANNING & ZONING MEETING February 15, 2001 APPLICANT Sundance Investments ITEM NO. 12 REQUEST CUP for floodway approval and a commercial PUD to include high-tech fabrication office, retail, health club and hotel/motel uses - southeast corner of overland and Eagle Roads AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: SANITARY SERVICE: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: No comment All codes, fire hydrants,, fire sprinkler systems need to be met No remarks No comment ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: See attached CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: See attached comments NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: OTHER: See attached comments Contacted: Date:Phone.• Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. cbrf,4 � f HD Ada oun 1 W istrI*ct Judy Peavey -Derr, President 318 East 37th Street Dave Bivens, 1 st Vice President Garden City ID 83714-6499 Sherry R. Huber, 2nd Vice President Phone (208) 387-6100 Susan S. Eastlake, Commissioner FAX (208) 387-6391 David E. WUynkoop, Commissioner E-mail: tellus@ACHD.ada.id.us January 23, 2001 Larson Architects Cornel Larson 210 Murray Street Boise, Idaho 83642 RE: Silverstone Corporate Center Dear Mr. Larson: RECEIVED JAN 2 5 2001 CITY OF MERIDUN The Silverstone Corporate Center will require a Traffic Impact Study based on the significant number of daily vehicle trips that this site will generate. The Ada County Highway District has received the preliminary plat application, but is unable to review the application until a Traffic Impact Study has been submitted and reviewed. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Ada County Highway District Andrea N. Tuning Development Analyst atuning@achd.ada.id.us 208-387-6177 phone 208-387-6393 fax ti S. cc: City-"'o'f Meridian Sundance Investments C00 CENTRAL CENTRAL OISTRICT HEALTH DEPAR i MENT DISTRICT HEALTH Environmental Health Divis�x,ECEIVEI3 DEPARTMENT JAN 2 2 2001 Rezone # Conditional Use # (:2,,-U-0 L1 j — e�, CITY OF MERIDIAN Preliminary / Final / Short Plat Return to: ❑ Boise J Eagle Ll Garden City ,ZCMeridian Ll Kuna ❑ ACZ Ll Star J 1. we have No objections to this Proposal. J 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. U 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. U 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ❑ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more'data concerning the depth of: ❑ high seasonal ground water ❑ waste flow characteristics ❑ or bedrock from original grade ❑ other ❑ 8. This office will require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and/or surface waters. J 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water availability. 8. After writte approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: central sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water well ❑ interim sewagecentral water Cl individual sewage ❑ individual water g. The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & welfare, Division=ntral ironmental Quality: sewage ❑ community sewage system ❑ community water ❑ sewage dry lines `central water 10. Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. Q 11. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ❑ 12. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ❑ 13. we will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ❑ food establishment ❑ swimming pools or spas ❑ child care center ❑ beverage establishment ❑ grocery store i 14. -�- Date;v) 1 /c f Reviewed By: 01 Sheet CORD 9100 kc c00 CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH. DEPARTMENT MAIN OFFICE 707 N. ARMSTRONG PL. s BOISE, ID 83704-0825 (208) 37 5-5 211 * FAX 327-8500 To prevent and treat disease acrd disability; to promote healthlifestyles; altd to protect and promote the health and griality of our environment. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that storm water be pre-treated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to ground -water and surface water quality. The engineers and architects involved with the design of this project should obtain current best management practices for storm water disposal and design a storm water management system that is preventing groundwater and surface water degradation. Manuals that could be used for guidance are: State of Idaho Catalog of Stormwater Best Management Practices For Idaho Cities and Counties. Prepared by the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, July 1997. Stormwater Best Management Practices Guidebook. Prepared by City of Boise Public Works Department, January 1997. Serving Valley, Elmore, Boise, and Ada Counties Ada 1 Boise County Office Ada,WIC Satellite Office Elmore County Office Valley County Office 707 N. Armsrong PI. 1606 Robert St. 520 E. 8th Street N. 703 N. 1 st Street, Boise. ID 83704 Boise, ID 83705 Mountain Home, ID 83647 P.O. Box 1448 Enviro. Health: 327-7449 Ph. 334-3355 Enviro. Health: 587-9225 McCall, ID. 83638 Family Planning: 327-7400 FAX: 334-3355 Family Health: 587-4407 - Ph. 634-7194 Immunizations: 327-7450 WIC: 587-4409 FAX: 634-2174 Senior Nutrition: 327-7460 FAX: 587-3521 WIC: 327-7488 FAX: 327-8500 MAYOR Robert D. Corrie CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Ron Anderson Keith Bird Tammy deWeerd Cherie McCandless r 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 288-2501 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 • Fax 887-1297 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (2.08) 884-5533 • Fax 888-6854 TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To insure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk, by: February S, 2001 Transmittal Date: January 10, 2001 Hearing Date: February 15, 2001 File No.: CUP 01-002 Request: Conditional Use Permit request for a commercial planned development and Floodway approval for proposed Silverstone corporate Center By: Larson Architects Location of Property or Project: SE corner of overland Road and Eagle Road Sally Norton, PIZ Bill Nary, PIZ Jerry Centers, PIZ Richard Hatcher, PIZ Keith Borup, PfZ Robert Corrie, Mayor Ron Anderson, CIC Tammy deWeerd, CIC Keith Bird, CIC Cherie McCandless, CIC Water Department Sewer Department Sanitary Service Building Department Fire Department Police Department City Attorney City Engineer Meridian School District Meridian Post Office (FP/PP) Ada County Highway District Community Planning Assoc. Central District Health Nampa Meridian lrrig. District Settlers irrigation District Idaho Power Co. (FP/PP) U.S. West (FP/PP) Intermountain Gas (FP/PP) Ada County (Annexation) Idaho Transportation Department Your Concise Remarks: � �� /sft-� 0 1 City Planner Parks Department (Residential Applications only) Gen - 26 PPIFPIPFP - 30 AZ - 27 RECEIVED JAN 16 2001 City of Meridian City Clerk Office MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor & City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Enginee Shari Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator Piz ff &AA-Y� Item too, �2. February 14, 2001 Re: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 78 Acres from R-1 to C -C and C -G with a Preliminary Plat for 15 Building Lots and a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Commercial Development to be known as SilverStone Corporate Center by Sundance Investments, Ltd. Partnership (# AZ -01-001 ; PP -01-001; ,CUP 01.002) We have reviewed these submittals and offer the following comments, as conditions of the applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council: LOCATION The property is located at the southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road. The property extends east % mile from Eagle Road and south V2 mile along Eagle Road. A single-family residence currently lies within the project boundary. Open pasture and vacant parcels (all in Ada County) are south, east and west. The property is designated as Mixed/Planned Use Development in the Comprehensive Plan. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES North — Two single --family residences, a nursery, and an ACHD Park and Ride Lot. South — Open pasture and vacant parcels; the Ridenbaugh Canal is located between 100-200 feet south of the southerly boundary. Southeast — A horse track owned by Sutherland Farms. East — An 80 -acre parcel Which is primarily vacantlagricultural ground with a single-family dwelling and several outbuildings, zoned RUT in Ada County. West -- Approximately 160 acres of vacant/agricultural land zoned RUT in Ada County. Southwest — Thousand Springs Subdivision. CURRENT OWNERS OF RECORD Ada County lists David W. Lewis as the property owner of the 78 acres, and he has submitted consent for this application. AZ -01-001 IPP -01-001 /CUP -01-002 S i lverstone. AZ . PP. C UP, doc HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY MAYOR A Good Place to Live Robert D. Corrie CITY OF MERIDIAN' CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS Roan Anderson 33 EAST IDAHO Keith Bird MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Tammy deWeerd (208) 888-4433 . FAX (208) 887-4813 Cherie McCandless City Clerk office Fax (208) 888421.8 MEMORANDUM: To: Mayor & City Council From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Enginee Shari Stiles, Planning & Zoning Administrator Piz ff &AA-Y� Item too, �2. February 14, 2001 Re: Request for Annexation and Zoning of 78 Acres from R-1 to C -C and C -G with a Preliminary Plat for 15 Building Lots and a Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Commercial Development to be known as SilverStone Corporate Center by Sundance Investments, Ltd. Partnership (# AZ -01-001 ; PP -01-001; ,CUP 01.002) We have reviewed these submittals and offer the following comments, as conditions of the applicant. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council: LOCATION The property is located at the southeast corner of Overland Road and Eagle Road. The property extends east % mile from Eagle Road and south V2 mile along Eagle Road. A single-family residence currently lies within the project boundary. Open pasture and vacant parcels (all in Ada County) are south, east and west. The property is designated as Mixed/Planned Use Development in the Comprehensive Plan. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES North — Two single --family residences, a nursery, and an ACHD Park and Ride Lot. South — Open pasture and vacant parcels; the Ridenbaugh Canal is located between 100-200 feet south of the southerly boundary. Southeast — A horse track owned by Sutherland Farms. East — An 80 -acre parcel Which is primarily vacantlagricultural ground with a single-family dwelling and several outbuildings, zoned RUT in Ada County. West -- Approximately 160 acres of vacant/agricultural land zoned RUT in Ada County. Southwest — Thousand Springs Subdivision. CURRENT OWNERS OF RECORD Ada County lists David W. Lewis as the property owner of the 78 acres, and he has submitted consent for this application. AZ -01-001 IPP -01-001 /CUP -01-002 S i lverstone. AZ . PP. C UP, doc t: Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 2 GENERAL COMMENTS/OVERVIEW (All Applications) 1. The applicant is requesting annexation and zoning with two separate zoning designations. The portion shown north and west of the proposed street in the preliminary plat would be zoned C- C, with the remainder zoned C --G. The applicant has submitted a proposed list of permitted uses with the application that will need to be included within a development agreement. Some uses requested are not permitted outright in either zone, or are prohibited in one zone or the other. Please carefully review the uses for acceptability, and those that should require separate conditional use permits. 2. Although the application contains narrative regarding two separate parcels and the applicant's desire to obtain building permits for these two parcels prior to final plat recordation, information obtained from the Ada County Assessor indicates only one parcel of record. If the applicant proposes to ask for more than one building permit prior to platting the property, the applicant will need to go through the one-time split procedure in Ada County prior to becoming annexed, as the City of Meridian has no provision for such a division without recordation of a plat. Roadway dedication shall be done through the subdivision process. 3. Ada County Highway District has requested a traffic impact study for this project and, to date, has not provided comments on these applications. 4. Applicant has requested latecomers' agreements for sewer and water extension and donation of a City well site. Legal counsel needs to review the applicant's proposed terms to determine if they are acceptable. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (All Applications) 1. All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of natural waterways, intersecting, crossing or lying adjacent and contiguous to the area being subdivided shall be tiled per City ordinance 12-4-13. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate im9ation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written co tion 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 9-4-5. wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. Final design locations and quantity are determined after Idaho Power Company completes power designs. Street light contractor to obtain design and permit from the Public Works Department prior commencing installations. 4. Compaction test results must be submitted to the Meridian Building Department for all lots receiving engineered backfll. Az -41-001; PR41-002; CUP -01-002 S ilversto ne. Az. PP. C UP �r c. Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 3 5. Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and/or as detailed in site-specific requirements. 6. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 7. A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. An operation and maintenance agreement for joint drainage facilities shall be developed for inclusion in the CC&R's of the subdivision. S. Outside lighting shall be designed and placed so as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas and in accordance with City ordinance. 9. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in the City of Meridian Zoning and Development ordinance. No temporary signage, flags, banners or flashing signs will be permitted. 10. Provide five -foot -wide sidewalks throughout development in accordance with City ordinance. 11. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. ANNEXATION &ZONING REQUIREMENTS (File #AZ -01-001) 1. The legal description submitted in the application appears to meet the requirements of the City of Meridian and State Tax Commission. The parcel is contiguous to the existing corporate city limits of Meridian. 2. The subject lots can be adequately served by public facilities, if the applicant extends these services, and the proposed uses will allow for orderly expansion of the city limits. 3. The applicant has submitted a list of proposed uses which, although not allowed for in the C -C or C -G zone in their entirety, may be allowed as part of a planned development. Some of the uses are not defined in Meridian's Zoning and Development ordinance, while other uses listed may be prohibited outright in the Zoning Schedule of Use Control. The list appears a little too all-inclusive and needs f u-ther refinement. Staff urges the P&Z Commission and City Council to carefully consider all proposed uses so the City Attorney can craft an acceptable development agreement. Staff recommends that the following uses not be permitted outright, but require additional approval under the conditional use permit process: Sales Lots Automobile Repair Shop All drive-through/drive-up window establishments All child care facilities AZ -01-01; PP -01-002; CUP -01-002 S ilversto ne. AZ . PP. C UP Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 4 Communication towers Nursing Homes (this was listed as both a proposed use and a prohibited use by the applicant) Missions; Food Kitchens Private schools Shelter home Staff recommends that the following uses be included in the list of permitted uses: Electrical Supplies and Appliances Electronic Equipment and Products Greenhouses, Nurseries Hotels/Motels (these would likely require a variance to height regulations unless a height variance is specifically approved as part of this application; the applicant has requested a height of 50 feet to highest parapet) Molded Plastic Products Public Service Facilities Public and Quasi -public Uses Staff further recommends that all residential uses listed be strictly prohibited unless approved as a planned unit development under a separate conditional use process. 4. A Development Agreement will be required as a condition of annexation. PRELIMINARY PLAT GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (File PP -01-001) 1. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform. 2. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public works Department. 3. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process. PRELIMINARY PLAT SITE SPECIFIC COMMENTS {File PP -01.001} 1. Sanitary sewer service to this site will be via extensions from the Five Mile Trunk that has recently been constructed under the freeway and south to overland Road. Applicant will be responsible to construct the 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. This site will be subject to latecomers' fees to reimburse those developers responsible for extending sever service under the freeway. Latecomers' fees are based on total land area of the plat and shall be paid prior to signature on the final plat. Az -01-001; PP -01-002; CUP -01-002 Silverstone.AZTP.CUP Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 5 2. Water service to this site will be via extensions from newly constructed mains under the interstate, and from extensions of existing mains installed in adjacent developments. 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. Please provide the Public works department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. Flow and pressure from the existing mains should be monitored with the Meridian water Department. 3. In the pre -design meeting, staff discussed their desire to extend sewer and water services through the development to the property on the eastern side. The applicant expressed their discomfort with a vehicular connection, but seemed agreeable to the connection of utilities; however, no provision has been made in the preliminary plat. Location and size of the mains for these connections shall be worked out with the Public Works staff. 4. Two -hundred -fifty- and 100 -watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public works Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. S. Underground, year-round pressurized irrigation must be provided to all landscape areas on site. Please submit hook --up and design details based on the proposed landscaping. Due to the size of landscaped area, primary water supply connection to the City's mains will not be allowed. Applicant shall be required to utilize any existing surface or well water for the primary source. If City water is proposed as a secondary source, developer shall be responsible to pay water assessments for the entire common open area. G. Applicant has not indicated whether the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to be owned and maintained by an association or the Nampa & Meridian. Irrigation District. If the system is being proposed as a private system, the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process shall review plans and specifications for the irrigation system. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual must be submitted prior to plan approval. 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 City water is proposed as a secondary source, developer shall be responsible to pay water assessments for all landscaped areas. 7. Show all existing and proposed easements for irrigation/drainage facilities located within the boundaries of this proposed development (i.e., Eight Mile Creek easement). S. Detailed landscape plans for the Overland Road and Eagle Road landscape frontage buffers and for street landscaping along Goldstone way and SilverStone way shall be submitted for review and approval with submittal of the Final. Plat application. This requirement does not include interior lot landscaping. Interior landscaping will be dealt with on a site -by -site review basis. A letter of credit or cash surety will be required for all required improvements prior to signature Az -01-001; PP -01-002; CUP -01-042 S i l verstvne. AZ . PP. C UP Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 6 on the Final Plat. 9. Staff recommends the Eagle Road and Overland Road landscape buffers be platted as separate common lots within the subdivision and maintenance be the responsibility of the Development Committee/Association. At a minimum, the landscape buffers shall be placed within a permanent landscape easement designated as such on the plat. No easements are currently shown. 10. Applicant shall provide the minimum required 35 feet of landscape buffer along Overland Road and Eagle Road, both entryway corridors. Landscape buffers are to be provided exclusive of required right-of-way. Landscape buffers must be completed prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy for any building within the subdivision. 1 1. Applicant is proposing gated entries into the subdivision. Staff does not support prohibiting access into the subdivision via gates. Gateway features provided only for beautification which do not restrict access is acceptable. 12. The site plan submitted with the conditional use permit does not match the preliminary plat. Applicant is to clarify the discrepancy or submit a revised plat that corresponds with the site plan.. The City does understand that the applicant desires the utmost flexibility, and may build a single building on one or more lots or a building on each individual lot. The main discrepancy appears to be that Titanium way is shown as a public road on the plat, but not on the site plan. 13. Note 4 of the preliminary plat needs to be revised. The Nampa -Meridian Irrigation District has allowed only pre --development runoff into their system. All drainage is to be retained on-site. 14. Four lots in the preliminary plat (including the lot proposed for a City well) are within the 100 - year floodplain. Detail plans for reducing or eliminating this boundary. All structures within the 100 -year floodplain will be subject to all provisions of Title 12, Chapter 9 of Meridian City Ordinance. 15. The legend needs to be revised to change the symbol for the section line to match the plat. 16. Adequate right-of-way is not shown on the plat or the site plan. A minimum of 48 feet from section line needs to be dedicated on both Overland Road and Eagle Road. Ada County Highway District may have additional right-of-way requirements near the intersection. The 35 - foot -wide landscape setback shall be beyond required right-of-way. CUP (PUD/COMMERCIAL) REQUIREMENTS (File CUP -01-002) 1. As part of a conditional use permit, the City of Meridian may impose restrictions and conditions in addition to current City Ordinances. AZ -01-001; PP -01-002; CUP -01-002 5 ilverstone. AZ . PP. C UP kr Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 7 2. This Conditional Use Permit is for the overall concept and mixture of uses. Significant changes to the plan as proposed will require modification of the CUP. Slight modifications that comply with the overall development plan approval will not require future public hearings. 3. Planned Development Regulations: As a mixed/planned use development, the SilverStone Corporate Center must comply with the following sections of the subdivision ordinance: 12-6-4 Procedures for Planned Developments, 12-6-6 General Regulations for Planned Development, and 12-6-7 General Standards for Planned Developments. All commercial and office uses must comply with 12-6-8-B, Design Standards for Planned Development -Commercial. 4. Site Plan: The copy of the single -story building master plan submitted with the application does not appear to be to an accurate scale. Detailed review of the site plan is not possible; only the concept is being reviewed. Detailed site plans that meet all parking lot dimensional and landscaping standards per City Ordinance will need to be reviewed and approved during the building permit process. 5. Open Space: All Planned Developments (PD) are required to have at least 10% of the gross land area of the PD as common open space per City Ordinance Section 12--6-7-E-5. The total common open space calculation for SilverStone Corporate Center is not shown. Please provide calculations showing how this criteria is met. The City's well lot will not be considered for inclusion in this requirement if reimbursement is sought for the value of the property. 6. Parking Lot Landscaping: Landscape islands serving a single row of parking shall have one tree. Islands serving a double row of parking shall have two trees. A planting island shall be provided to break up the asphalt every 12 continuous. stalls. The site plan submitted does not meet this requirement. The detailed landscape plan for the Silverstone Point building is at a scale and meets or exceeds all landscaping requirements. All site plans will be reviewed at the building permit stage to ensure compliance with the Meridian Landscape Ordinance. Staff review of the overall site plan is general only, and specific review will occur upon application for building permits. 7. Streets and Circulation: The proposed project is designed as a stand-alone development with no provision for access to other properties. Staff recommends public road access be provided to the property east of this development. Additionally, as the relatively narrow strip of property south of this proposed subdivision will have few options for development, staff recommends that Titanium way be stubbed to the south property line. Staff also supports full collector status roadways to be developed on half -section lines, which would fall at this property's southerly boundary. 8. Signage: Although signage locations are noted on the plan, no details of proposed signage were included. Applicant will be responsible for proposing a sign program. for the entire development as part of the conditional use process. AZ -01-0U 1; PRO 1-042; CUP -0 1-002 S i Iverstone. AZ. PP .CUP `f Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 8 9. Trash Enclosures: Very few trash enclosures are shown on the Conceptual Site Plan.,. Applicant shall coordinate locations and construction requirements of the required trash enclosures with Meridian Sanitary Service, Inc., and provide a letter of approval from their office when applying for a Certificate of Zoning Compliance. 10. Alternative Transportation Options: At build -out, this site will serve as a principal center of employment for the east Meridi.arilwest Boise area. while Boise Urban Stages does not currently service Overland Load, it has the potential to be a likely destination point for mass transit in the future. Staff strongly recommends an area be designated and/or preserved on the Concept Plan for a future bus stop. we also recommend the inclusion of bicycle racks at all office and retail buildings. 11. All conditions placed on this application shall run with the land and shall not lapse or be waived as the result of any change in tenancy or ownership of any or all of the lands governed by this CUP application. All such conditions shall be deemed the requirements for the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any use or structure as per City Ordinance. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ANALYSIS The 1993 Comprehensive Plan contains a variety of goals and policies relevant to this application. The following sections most directly apply to the proposed project and are repeated here for the Council and Commission's consideration during the hearing process. Goal 3 is "to encourage the kind of economic growth and development which supplies employment and economic self-sufficiency for existing and future residents, reduces the present reliance on Boise and strengthens the City's ability to finance and implement public improvements, services, and its open space character." Goal 5 is "to preserve and improve the character and quality of Meridian's mean -made environment while maintaining its identity as a self-sufficient community." Goal 8 is "to establish compatible and efficient. use of land through the use of innovative and functional site design." Economic Development .wnrnu.inirirr�wir.�wur ■rni.�r� 1.1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere that encourages... commercial enterprises to locate in Meridian. 1.2 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas where commercial and industrial interest and activities are to dominate. 1.3. The character, site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial developments should be harmonized with the natural environment and respect the unique needs and features of each area. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 2.2U Encourage and support job market expansion that provides for mid- and upper --range wage scale and benefits. • AZ -01 -GO 1; PP -01-042; CUP -0 1-002 S ilverstone.AZ . PP. C UP Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 9 Land Use 1.5U Encourage a balance of land uses to ensure that Meridian remains a desirable, stable and self- sufficient community. 1.6U Develop a land use review process that involves the public in the conceptual stage of a development proposal and utilizes staff expertise to address detailed standards. LIOU Promote the design of attractive roadway entryway areas into Meridian which will clearly identify the community. 1.11 U Protect citizen investments in existing public facilities (water,, sewer, streets, fire, police) by encouraging controlled growth through city planning reviews and development agreements. 4.8U Encourage commercial uses, offices and medical -care uses to locate in the old Town district, business parks, shopping centers and near high-intensity activity areas, such as freeway interchanges. 5.6 The development of a variety of compatible land uses should be provided in specific plan and proposals for future development. 5.10 Development should be conducted under Planned Unit Development procedures and as conditional uses, especially when two or more differing uses are proposed. 5.12 Strip development within this mixed-use area is not in compliance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 5.13 Clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterials and collector streets will be required. 5.14U Because these areas are near I-84, Franklin and Overland Roads, high-quality visual appearance is essential. All development proposals in this area will be subject to development review guidelines and conditional use permitting procedures. 5.15U The mixed-use area in the vicinity of the Overland Road/Franklin Road/Eagle Road/I-84 interchange is a priority development area. Natural Resources and Hazardous Areas 3.1 U Manage and prevent unsuitable uses along drainageways and protect the floodplain of creeks and drains. 4.1U Developments contiguous to natural waterways, irrigation canals, laterals and drainage ditches must consider all available information concerning floodplain waterways. Public Services Utilities and EneMy Resources 5.2 All new developments will be phased for connection to the municipal water system within the Urban Service Planning Area. 5.4 Adequate water supply will be available for fire protection. 5.5 All development in the USDA shall be required to connect to the municipal sewer system. 5.8U Procure and develop additional water sources to ensure sufficient water supply for future residential and industrial demands. Transportation 1.4U Monitor and coordinate the compatibility of the land use and transportation system. 1.5U Encourage clustering of uses and controlled access points along arterial, collector and section line roads. AZ -01-0Q 1; PP -01-042; CUP -01-002 S i 1 Verstone.AZ. PP. CUP f ( Mayor and Council February 14, 2001 Page 10 1.10U Require traffic studies evaluating the impact of generated traffic volumes (internal. and external circulation) on adjacent streets and to preserve the integrity of residential neighborhoods, as requested by the City. Open -Space, Parks and Recreation 3.1 Establish a network of open space corridors that are either improved, semi -improved or unimproved which have the potential to enhance local identification within the area. CommuniY Design 1.3 Open space areas within all development should be encouraged. 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. 2.1 U Encourage area beautification through uniform sign design that enhances the community. 2.3U Encourage the beautification of streets, parking lots, public lands, and state highways. 2.5U Encourage the use of attractive open space, landscaping, lighting and street furniture for the benefit of the public. 4.4U Encourage landscaped setbacks for new development on entrance corridors. The City shall require, as a condition of development approval, landscaping along all entrance corridors. 5.2 Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. AZ -01-001; PP -01-002; CUP -01 -002 s i ivers#o ne.AZ. PP. C UP R "OCEIVED FEB - 1 2001 CITY of MERIDIAN I • i i / / 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-463-0092 Phones: Area Code 208 January 18, 2001 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 466-663 Will Berg, City Clerk City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Re: CUP 0I-002 Conditional Use permit and Floodway approval for proposed Silverstone Corporate Center Dear Commissioners.- The ommissioners: The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District has no comment on the Floodway approval for the above-mentioned application. However, a Land Use Change application must be filed with the Conditional Use permit. Sincerely, Bill Henson, Asst. Water Superintendent NAMPA &MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT BH: dln Cc: File --- Shop File — office Water Superintendent APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 Ada County Highway District 318 E. 37th Street Boise, ID 83714 (208) 387-6100 (208) 387-6391 FAX Please Deliver to: CITY CLERK Fax #: 888-4218 Company: CITY of MERIDIAN From: Joyce Newton Fax #: (208) 387-6391 Phone: (288) 387-6100 Pages: 13 #17028 PRGE: 1,/13 �y�jJC11 ZS�i Message: Here is the finalized report for Silverstone corporate Center. per ACHD commission action on March 14, 2001. MAR 20 'Al 11:Rf; I LL NU (eWb) ,387-8381 i ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT Planning and Development Division Development Application Report Preliminary Plat — Silverstone Corporate Center slelc Overland Road/Eagle Road MPP -0 1-00 l IMCUP-01-o02lMAZ- 01-001 #17028 PR E. 2/i3 15 -lots The application has been referred to ACHD by the City of Meridian for review and comment. Silverstone is a 15 -lot office/commercial subdivision on 78 -acres. The applicant is requesting p q g a rezone from R-1 to C -CIC -G. The site is located at the southeast corner of overland Road and Eagle Road. This development is estimated to generate 9,629 additional vehicle trips�' er da based on the submitted traffic impact study. p This item is being placed on the regular agenda due to concerns of thea applicant regarding stub pP regardingstreets and driveways, and also concerns from the property owner to the south regarding access through this site. g g Roads impacted by this development: Overland Road Eagle Road Interstate 84 ACHD Commission Bate — March 14, 2001 — 6:30 p.m. REGULAR AGENDA ITEM r'acts and nndings: S 11verstone. cmm Page 1 MOP ;)A I M1 1 1 : R7 % L.CJU 00 %JU ► ---.Il A. General Infonn ation Owner — Sundance Investments Applicant — Larson Architects, Quadrant Consulting R-1 -Existing zoning (low-density residential) G -GIC -G — Proposed zoning (general commercial) 78 - Acres 15 - Proposed building lots 1 -Proposed common lots 640 - Total lineal feet of proposed public streets 9,629 - Total vehicle trips per day 285 -Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) West Ada -Impact Fee Service Area Meridian -Impact Fee Assessment District Ove- l.4rid Rnark Minor arterial with bike lane designation Traffic count of 13, 5 51 on 11--3 0-99 (c/o Eagle Road) Traffic count of 11, 422 on 11-3 0--99 (w/o Eagle Road) D -Existing Level of Service Greater than E -Existing plus project build -out Level of Service 11300 -feet of frontage 50 -feet existing right-of-way (25-fect from centerline) 54 to 48 -feet required right-of-way from centerline Overland Road is improved with 2 -lanes with no curb, gutter or sidewalk abutting the site. There is a southbound turn lane on Overland Road at the Eagle Road intersection. The Overland/Eagle Road intersection currently operates at a level of service F. Eagle Road Minor arterial with bike lane designation Traffic count of 197 790 on 11-3 0-99 (nJo Overland Road) Traffic count of 7,495 on 2-2-00 (s/o Overland Road) Traffic count of 44,397 on 10-19-99 (n/o I-84) G -Existing Level of Service D -Existing plus project build -out Level of Service 2,600 -feet of frontage 50 -feet existing right-of-way (25 -feet from centerline) 52 to 48 -feet required right-of-way from centerline Abutting the site Eagle Road is improved with two travel lanes, with no curb, gutter or sidewalk. North of Overland Road Eagle Road widens to 5-1anes. North of I-84 Eagle Road is under the jurisdiction of ITD. Silverstone. cmm Page 2 MAR 20 '01 11: 07 Mnr_7= M77 #17028 PACE : 4/13 fr. t Interstate 84 Traffic count of 0 -feet of frontage Interstate 84 is three lanes eastbound and three lanes westbound. There is an "ON" and "OFF"' ramp at Eagle Road. B. The Overland/Eagle Road and Meridian/Overland Road intersections operate at a Level of Service F (LOS F), and are listed as one of the 100 most critical intersections in Ada County. Access control within the operating area of the intersection is vital to the safe operations of the intersection. The subject site's additional tratrc will exacerbate the traffic problems at these intersections. C. On March 2, 2001, the staff met as the District's Technical Review Committee and reviewed the impacts of this proposed development on the District's transportation system. The result p y s of that analysis constitute the following Facts and Findings and recommended Site Specific Requirements. D. A traffic study was submitted for the SilverStone Corporate Center in M find - p Meridian, Idaho. The key Ings of the traffic study include the following. ■ The proposed development is projected to generate an daily average traffic g y (ADT),of 9,629 vehicles per day (vpd), of which the peak hour traffic(PHT)is 1021 vehicles per hour (vph). ■ At build out, the project will add 6, 317 vehicles pet- day to Eagle Road north o g f the Stte, ofthESe tr ' s 847 will take the westbound 1-84 ramp, 2, 504 will travel eastbound on I--84r� a d the remaining 2,966 will continue to the north. An additional 1,100 vehicles per da will gave south of the site on Eagle p y s gl Road. The project will add 1,380 vehicles per da to Overland Road east of the site and 850 vehicle p y s per day west of thne site. ■ The intersection of Eagle Road and overland Road is currents operating at F. t y p b Level of Service (LOS) I will operate at LOS F under background traffic conditions with or without tyle site being developed. This development should be required to participate in improvements to this intersection to bring, it to an acceptable level of service. ■ The intersections of Eagle Road and the eastbound and westbound off -ramps of Iw84 will function at an acceptable level of service with the addition of site traffic. This assumes gnat the proposed signal on the eastbound ofd ramp is constructed by ITD. ■ The intersection of Eagle Road and Franklin Road will i operate at LOS F with th or without the project. Improvements to this intersection will require additional right-of-way and coordination natiol with other projects. Since the majority of the traffic will be coming from other growth in the area, widenitng of this intersection should be considered h the ACHD and IT D. D. The intersection of Overland Road and Meridian Road will operate at LOS traffic c p F under background tra oinditions and LOS F with the addition of site traffic. Additional lanes are r equired to make this intersection operate at an acceptable LOS D. This intersection is within the limits of a proposed project by ACRD. The site traffic should be included in theg lannin of the ACHI� improvements project. p ■ The intersection of Overland Road and Cloverdale Road will require improvements q p inerts to operate at LOS E. This area will probably see development in the comingears. It is recommended the project will - �' ommended that p j contribute to the future reconstruction of this intersection. S ilverstone. emm Page 3 MAR 20 '01 11:00 -- - - - F ICL I `IV ■ � ��� � .�� �-'��� 1 �r #17028 PAGE: 5/13 ■ The intersection of Overland Road and Five Mile Road will suffer a small increase in delay due to project traffic. Other growth will contribute to most of the deterioration of the intersection. The project should not be required to participate in the reconstruction of this intersection. n ersection. ■ The intersection of Eagle Road and victory Road will operate at an acceptable leve LOS E after p P ? of service, the build out of this project. Eagle Road south if the project will operate at an acceptable level of service after P build out of the project. The site should contribute right-of-way for future roadway e y pans�on. ince Eagle Road is on a section lime, it is assumed that the future roadway will be a five -lane road. ■ Eagle Road north of the site will operate at an acceptable level of service after build out of file project. ■ Overland Road west of Eagle Road will operate at an acceptable level of service ,. p e for a three --lane road. A three lane road is proposed to be built by ACHD on this section of roadwa ■ le Road will o Y� Overland Road east of Eagle operate at a poor level of service after build out of the project. The project should be required to dedicate right-of-way for a five -lane futu re roadway. In the interim, the project should be required to construct a ri ht -turn lane and a g left -turn lane for the full frontage of the project along Overland Road. ■ The project should be required to construct a signal at the main entrance to the site on Eagle Road and to the main entrance to the site on Overland Road. Each signal will � require a left -turn lane and a right -tum lane. E. The, applicant is proposing to construct two driveways on Overland Road and one public street connection. The proposed accesses are located; • 400 -feet east of Eagle Road (western driveway) • 690 -feet east of Eagle Road and 265 -feet east of western driveway (middle driveway) • 1,070 -feet east of Eagle Road (public street) District policy 7204.7.3 states that access points on arterials are based on the following: *♦• One access point for less than 150 -feet of frontage ❖ Two access points for 150 -600 -feet of frontage ❖ Three access points for greater than 600 -feet of frontage. Access points are considered to be both public streets and driveways. The applicant is proposing to construct three accessoints on Overland Road p in accordance with District policy. The ACHD Commission approved these three accessoints p on overland Road. F. The applicant is proposing to construct five drivewa s on Eagle Road and Y � one public street connection. The proposed accesses are located: • 400 -feet south of Overland Road (northern driveway) • 690 -feet south of Overland Road and 265 -feet south of northern drivewaydrivewa middle 3') • 420 -feet south of northern middle driveway (middle driveway) • 1,590 -feet south of Overland Road (public street) • 410 -feet south of public street (southern driveway) • At the south property line (shared southern driveway District policy 7244.7.3 states that access paints on arterials are based on the fallowing. •f• One access point for less than 150 -feet of frontage g S ilverstone. cmm Page 4 MAR 20 '01 11 : 09 #17028 PAGE: G/13 Y* Two access points for 150 -600 -feet of frontage I,,e Three access points for greater than 600 -feet of frontage. Access points are considered to be both public streets and driveways. The applicant is proposing to construct six access points on Eagle Road. District olio allows three access Dints. Six access � policy p points would require a variance from the Commission. Staff recommends adherence of policy because the applicant is constructing aublic street through the P g site and should have sufficient access internally and with three accessydrivewa oints(twos and P one public street) on Eagle Road. The proposed driveways are located on sharedroPe�5' lines P and staff recommends that the applicant construct: a driveway at the south roe line to • property �Y provide for future shared access with the parcel to the south; the spine road connection and a P , a second driveway located north of the spine road, but located a minimum of 440 -feet south of Overland Road. The applicant does not concur with staff's recommendation on the number of accessp oints on Eagle Road, and will provide information to the Commission requesting a modification of policy. The ACRD Commission approved three access points on Eagle Road with this application, pp One access point shall be located at the south property line, and shall be constructed as a shared driveway. The second access point shall be the proposed public road located asro osed. p p The third access point shall be located a minimum of 440 -feet south of Overland Road and a minimum 440 -feet north of the proposed public street that will be signalised in the future. G. The applicant is proposing to construct a spine road through the site with connections at g overland Road and Eagle Road. Due to the volumes of traffic this development is expected to generate, the applicant should construct this roadway as a 46 -foot street section with curbs, gutters and sidewalks. If the applicant constructs attached sidewalks, the sidewalk should be constructed- 7 feet wide, and the street should be constructed within 64 -feet of right-of-way. If the applicant constructs detached sidewalks, the sidewalk should be constructed 5 -feet wide and the street should be constructed within 70 -feet of right-of-way. Parking should be restricted on the proposed street, and the applicant should submit a signage plan prior to final plataPProval. H. The applicant's site plan indicates a traffic signal on overland Road at the intersection with the proposed public street, located approximately 1/4 -mile east of Eagle Road and one on Eagle R � s Road od located approximately 1l3 -mile south of Overland Road. It is not clear from theapplicant's proposal if the intent is for the traffic signals to be constructed with the� or ecJ ro'if the are p y shown on the plan as "future". According to the submitted traffic stud at full build -out; t, file project should be required to construct the signals, and the necessary site improvements associated with the signals: left -turn lanes and right -turn lanes. Based on ACHD Commission action, traffic signals cannot be installed at these intersections until there is a warrant. The applicant's traffic engineer should work with ACHD Traffic Services Staff to determine when the warrant is met, or is close to being met. The developer should be fnnanclall responsible for the c p Y res p cost of one-half of the signal. If the properties across from this subdivision have not been developed prior to the signal warrant, thea applicant of this site - pP � e shall fund 100 / 0 of the cost of the signals. At the time that those properties develo a road trust will I be acquired and this applicant shall be reimbursed for one half of the cost of the signal. gn 1. Thi s applicant should enter into a written agreement with the District for these two traffic signals. gn Is. 5 ilverstone. cmm Page S MAR 20 '01 11:10 I LL HU; ; k eUU) �38Y-6391 Il 1 1 LLL+ PAGE • 7/13 S I. The applicant should be required to construct center turn lanes on Overland Road anda E gle Road for the proposed public street intersections and for full access driveways. The roadways y y are currently only 2 -lanes in width, and the submitted traffic study determined that these lanes should be required. J. The applicant is proposing to construct islands at the main entrances to thero osed s p p pine roads. The islands may interfere with turning movements at the signals. The applicant should co g pp ordinate the intersection designs with District Traffic Services staff. K. Driveways on the proposed spine road should be located a minimum distance of 175 -feet from Eagle Road and Overland Road, and should align or offset a minimum of 125 -feet from any proposed driveways. The site plan shows driveways on the proposed street located within 25 -feet feet of other proposed driveways, and some of the driveways are constructed with medians: such a configuration is confusing to the motorist. The applicant should revise the sitelan and relocate locate driveways in accordance with district policy. L. The applicant is proposing to construct a large island in the middle of the spine road, - p d, with driveways on both sides, The driveways are located so that motorists could make unsafe left turn s from the driveways. The applicant should either: construct the island as a true roundabout; eleliminate" � - - udbout, the driveways; or eliminate the island. M. The applicant is proposing to construct a local street off of the spine road. The location p c txan of the street conforms to ACHD policy. The street should be constructed as a local/commercial street: 40 -foot street section with curbs, gutters and 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalks within 58 - feet of right-of-way. At the meeting on March 14 2001, the applicant submitted a drawing'indicating that would be this street stubbed to the undeveloped 80 -acre property to the east. Based on thea licanv s testimony, and the need for interconnectivitypp the ACHD Commission required this stub street as a condition of approval. The stub street should be constructed to the east property line between Lot 5 and p � Lot 6, Block 1. The applicant should provide a paved temporary turnaround at the east end of the stub with a temporary easement provided to the District. The applicant should be required to install a sign a g g t the terminus of the roadway stating that; "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sign plan for the stub street, and the design of the turn District staff. g turnaround w�tl1 N. Utility street cuts in 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. 0. Irrigation facilities should be relocated outside of the new y ri ht -of -gra on Overland rland Road and Eagle Road. 5 ilverstone. emm Page 6 MAR 20 101 11:11 I LL I',u � ��f --t�.� 1 #17028 PAGE : 8/13 I P. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site should be borne by the developer. � g Q. The applicant is not proposing to construct any stub streets to the undeveloped parcels to the south. District policy requires stub streets to provide access to adjoining properties. The parcel to the south is 27 -acres, and that property owner also owns several surrounding properties. The property owner to the south of this site (Sutherland Farms) has requested that the applicant be q required to construct a stub street to serve his property, and also construct an cast -west collector street along the common property line to serve his property. It is likely that the roe to the . property �`�' south will develop as residential, as is designated in the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has agreed to construct a driveway at the south property line that would serve as a shared access with the property owner. Staff does not recommend that thea applicant be required pp to construct an east -west collector street along the south property line, as the applicant is constructing a collector roadway through the site and it is not needed along the south property line. If theapplicant � P p � constructs a stub street to the property to the south, the minimum length of the road would be 750 -feet. The average cost to build a local street is $8011inear foot. The approximate cost to construct a stub street to the south property line would be $60,000. Staff does not recommend the construction of a stub street to the southrope�' line. p The applicant is opposed to the construction of any stub streets to surrounding pro erties. p At the Commission meeting on March 14, 2001, a representative of thep arcel to the south testified on behalf of Sutherland Farms and requested a stub street to the southroPe�' line. P The ACHD Commission required the construction of a shared driveway at the south property line, but did not require the construction of a stub street to the south. R. In accordance with District policy, the applicant should be required to construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk on overland Road abutting the entire site. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. S. In accordance with District policy, the applicant should be required to construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk on Eagle Road abutting the entire site. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff: T. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat should be owned and maintained by Silverstone owners. Notes of this should be required on the final plat. U. In order to reduce trips to and from this development it is recommended that Tenants occupying py g the proposed building be required to provide an Alternative Transportation Program for employees and provide an annual report to ACHD on employee participation. Commuteride staff` will coordinate the Alternative Transportation Program with the applicant. For more information contact Pat Nelson at 3 87-6160. V. In order to reduce trips to and from this development, it is recommended that the tenants occupying the proposed building(s) be required to participate in any on Trans ortatiManagement Transportation g S ilverstone. cmm Page 7 MAR 20 }01 11:11 .� .- . . mss,. r ._ _-L.V i r° i LL. y�J • 4 G4J JtJ(--b,:J'J1 # 1 UJ -8 PAGE • 9/13 l Association (TMA) or Transportation Management Organization (TMO) that is formed with a boundary that includes this site or is adjacent to this development. W. A Transportation Management Association (TMA) or Transportation Management Organization (TMO) is formed with a coordinator that works as a liaison between businesses and private and public transportation providers to increase the use of alternative transportation and other trip reduction measures (shuttle buses, bus pass programs, vanpools, carpools, bicycle and walking enhancements). An annual survey will be required of the TMA/TMO to monitor participation in alternative transportation programs and forwarded to the ACRD Commuteride Office. X. Based on development patterns in this area and the resulting traffic generation, staff anticipates that the transportation system will not be adequate to accommodate additional traffic generated by this proposed development at accepted levels of service with out modifications to Eagle Road and overland Road, and the intersection. Special Recommendation to ITD: 1. According to the submitted traffic study, the proposed development is projected tog enerate an average daily traffic (ADT) of 9,629 vehicles per day (vpd), of which the peak hour traffic (PHT) is 1,021 vehicles per hour (vph). At build out, the project will add 6,317 vehicleser day y to Eagle Road north of the site, of these trips 847 will take the westbound I-84 ramp, 2,504 will travel eastbound on 1-84, and the remaining 2,966 will continue to the north. Special recommendation to City of Meridian: 1. In order to reduce trips to and from this development it is recommended that tenants occupying py g the proposed building be required to provide an Alteniative Transportation Program for employees and provide an annual report to ACRD on employee participation. Con-nnuteride staff' will coordinate the Alternative Transportation Program with the applicant. For more information contact Ms. Pat Felson at 3 87-x6160. 2. In order to reduce trips to and from this development, the tenants occupying the proposed building(s) should be required to participate in any Transportation Management Association (TMA) or Transportation Management Organization (TMO) that is formed with a boundary that includes this site or is adjacent to this development. 3. The Overland/Eagle Road and Meridian/Overland Road intersections operate at a Level of Service F (LOS F), and are listed as one of the 100 most critical intersections in Ada County. Access control within the operating area of the intersection is vital to the safe operations of the intersection. The subject site 7 s additional traffic will exacerbate the traffic problems at these intersections. 4. Based on development patterns in this area and the resulting traffic generation, staff' anticipates that the transportation system will not be adequate to accommodate additional trafficg enerated by this proposed development at accepted levels of service with out modifications to Eagle Road and overland Road, and the intersection. 5 ilverstone. cmm Page S MAR 20 101 1.1:12 I VJ - D� MHK C�U TUU 1 r__ _ I LL NU; (e-1JU) #17028 PAGE: 10/13 The following Site Specific Requirements and Standard Requirements must be met or provided for prior to ACHD approval of the final plat: Site Specific Requirements: 1. Dedicate 54 to 48 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Overland 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 34 business days to process the right-of-way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The owner will be paid the fair market value of the right-of-way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACHD right-of-way. 2. Dedicate 52 to 48 -feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Eagle 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 paid the fair market value of the right-of-way dedicated which is an addition to existing ACHD right -of --way. 3. The following access points on Overland Road are approved with this application: • 400 -feet east of Eagle Road (western driveway) • 690 -feet east of Eagle Road and 265 -feet east of western driveway (middle driveway) • 1,070 -feet east of Eagle Road (public street) 4. The following access points on Eagle Road are approved with this application: • A minimum of 444 -feet south of Overland Road and a minimum 444 -feet north of the proposed public street. • 1,590 -feet south of Overland Road (public street) + At the south property line (shared southern driveway) 5. Construct a spine road through the site with connections at Overland Road and Eagle Road, located as proposed. Construct the roadway as a 46 -foot street section with curbs, gutters and sidewalks. If the applicant constructs attached sidewalks, the sidewalk shall be constructed 7 - feet wide, and the street shall be constructed within 64 -feet of right -of -moray. If the applicant constructs detached sidewalks, the sidewalk shall be constructed 5 -feet wide, and the street shall be constructed witllll174-feet of right-of-way. Parking shall be restricted on the proposed street, and the applicant shall submit a signage plan prior to final plat approval. 6. This applicant should enter into a written agreement with the District for the constructions timing and funding of the two proposed traffic signals: one on Overland Road located at the quarter - mile, and one on Eagle Road at approximately the half -mile. S11verstone. cmm Page 9 -- -- - _... _ . , _ _..... i t—tr [ �a„r • 4 �E'JG] � .RC1 f �"C�.3� 1 t 4 ffI(Uc"d FHGL: II/13 Traffic signals cannot be installed at these intersections until there is a warrant. The applicant's traffic engineer should work with ACRD Traffic Services staff to determine when the warrant is met; or is close to being net. The developer shall be financially responsible for the cost of one- half of the signal. If the properties across from this subdivision have not been developed prior to p the signal warrant; the applicant of this site shall fund 100% of the cost of the signals. At the time that those properties across the street develop,a road trust will be acquired d t ` q an nus applicant shall be reimbursed for one half of the cost of the signal. 7. Construct center turn lanes on Overland Road and Eagle Road for the proposedP ublic street intersections and for full access driveways. 8. The applicant shall coordinate the intersection designs with District Traffic Services staff'. 9. Driveways on the proposed spine road shall be located a minimum distance of 175 -feet from Eagle Road and overland Road, and shall align or offset a minimum of 125 -feet from any proposed driveways. 14. The applicant is proposing to construct a large island in the middle of the spine road, with driveways on both sides. The applicant shall: construct the island as a true roundabout; eliminate the driveways; or eliminate the island. 1 1. Stub Titanium Way to the east property line between Lot 5 and Lot 6, Block 1. Construct Titanium Way as a 44 --foot street section with curbs, gutters and 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalks within 58 -feet of right-of-way, with a standard turnaround at the south end. Provide ap aved temporary turnaround at the east end of the stub with a temporary easement provided to the District. The applicant should be required to install a sign at the terminus of the roadway stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IIT THE FUTURE". Coordinate the sin tan for the stub streetand the design g P deslbin of the turnaround with District star: 12. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing g by the District. Contact Construction Services at 387-62$4 (with file numbers) for details. 13. Irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the new right-of-way on Overland Road and Eagle Road. 14. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 15. Construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk on Overland Road abutting the entire site. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 16. Construct a 5 -foot wide concrete sidewalk on Eagle Road abutting the entire site. Coordinate the location and elevation of the sidewalk with District staff. 17. Any proposed landscape islands/medians within the public right-of-way dedicated by this plat shall owned and maintained by Silverstone owners. Notes of this shall be required on the final plat. S ilverstone. cmm Page 10 MMR 20 '01 11; 14 i L► - ..•.� i ini L 1 Ls.+�+ i. r I LL- i 1V • 4 C.U0 J ,7Q f —0J Z� 1 1t 1 f UC0 r I"kzc- + 1 l f i 18. Other than the access points specifically approved with this application, direct lot or parcel access to Overland Road and Eagle Road is prohibited. Lot access restrictions, as required with this application, shall be stated on the final plat. Standard Requirements: 1. A request for modification, variance or waiver of any requirement or policy outlined herein shall be made 'n writing to the ACHD Planning and Development Supervisor. The request shall specifically- identify each requirement to be reconsidered and include a „written ex_planation of wh such a requirement would result in a substantial hardshipor jaeAuity. The written re uest shall be submitted to the District no later than 9:00 a.m. on the day scheduled 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 $110.00. The re nest for reconsideration shall specifically identify each reguirement to be reconsidered „ and include written documentation of data that was not available to the Commission at the time of its original decision. The request for reconsideration will be heard by the District Commission at the next regular meeting of the Commission. If the 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 construction in accordance with Ordinance #193,1 also known as Ada County Highway District Road Impact Fee Ordinance. 4. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the Ada County Highway District Policy Manual, ISPwC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACHD Ordinances unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 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. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of the Ada County Highway District prior to District approval for occupancy. 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 DIGLINE (1-800-342-1585) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact S ilverstone. emm Page 11 MAP PA 'P11 11:14 an rt = .1 In 1111 LILJ a L-L.�GJ J. r-t-iLi i J V i S.J J 1 L Zit I UL_U I M%V LL JJ 1 J r' t ACHD Traffic operations 3 87-6190 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. Conclusion of Lave: 1. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular and pedestrian transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. Should you have any questions or comments, please contact the Planning and Development Division at 387-6170. Submitted Commission Action: Planning and .Development Staff March 14 2001 Silverstone. rnm Page 12 MAR PR } Al 11 : 1 .1� Dar= d 7 ...ARM -.,::: ..�: •r.:.. .: .:� p:.',$ .,: �.i.4• 'siJill g,.'.:- wa ....e.. ��-�_:�.. -�� �� Mme. �•: A .... � ...,� .�.,....rt M,>� ��Kr� r : mom• :.. �.'.• ; 3=° a;�. �s Wim. -x r�• r'ag. �;n= 777 M,z ter. w v�I625- #� x �g 4 a; Jho .. 3' a,• , �.. .i. .. .: n4•n.... ..• . .._ .. �"Y � I - _ �.dJ. S"� p �uP £' � 1 �icK:�.: .., - 1� rn !Z C D� W CO U) co __. a U m u a�"6- � E uw8 U U co c CC) c] a, CITY OF MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, March 20, 2001, at 6-.00 p.m. City Council Chambers 'I. Roll -call Attendance: Tammy de Weerd Ron Anderson Cherie McCandless Keith Bird )<' Mayor Robert Corrie 2. Adoption of the Agenda: /,?,o C1jan_.� 3. Presentation by COMPASS: I-84 Corridor Study kasj-j\a-, 6 ?- Z Meridian City Council Special Meeting Agenda --- March 24, 2001 Page I of I All materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. Anyone desiring accommodation for disabilities related to documents and/or hearings, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 888-4433 at least 72 hours prior to the public meeting. fr: t Ci of Meridian Special Meeting Tuesday,March 20 2001 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Meridian City council was called to order on Tuesday, March 20, 2001, by Mayor Robert D. Corrie at 6:00 p.m. Members Present: Robert Corrie, Tammy De Weerd, Keith Bird, Ron Anderson Members Absent: Cherie McCandless Others Present: Cary Smith, Shari Stiles, Bill Gordon, Bill Nichols, Will Berg Corrie: It is six p.m., and I am going to open the City Council City of meridian special meeting for the agenda. Roll call attendance. Item '1. . Roll -call Attendance: X Tammy de Weerd X Ron Anderson Cherie McCandless X Keith Bird X Mayor Robert Corrie Item 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Corrie: Item 2 is the adoption of the agenda, which is the presentation by CCMASS and the 1-84 Corridor Study. If there is no objections I will hear a motion to adopt the agenda of the special meeting. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: I move that we adopt the agenda for the special meeting for the presentation by COMPASS. De Weerd: Second. Bird: Motion made and seconded to adopt the agenda. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES Corrie: I guess we are all set. Item 3. Presentation by COMPASS: I-84 Corridor Study Splet: Good evening Mayor and Council and Staff. My name is Dave Splet. I am an engineer with the Washington Group, that is the new name for the Morrison-Knudsen Corporation. So if you have any cash I will be glad to take it tonight. Bird: How about stock? Meridian City Council Workshop March 20, 2001 Page 2 Splet: It is a big joke at the office you know. Some of us bought it when it went down to $1.25 and went up to $2.50 and now it is headed back to $'1.25 again. With me today is Mary Anne Waldinger, she is the analyst with COMPASS who is actually paying for the study. Actually they are handling the, I think the state and your taxes paid for a big part of too. The reason I came by today is to chat and let you folks know the current status of this multi-year long-range pian. The main reason is to let you folks know we are having an open house meeting over here at the Meridian Conference Center from 4pm to Bpm tomorrow afternoon. It will be the drop-in format not a lecture series, so you can come in any time. Walk around the booths that you want to walk around and leave your comments and leave at your convenience. We will have cookies and snacks and stuff too so that alone would be worth the trip I think. What I want to do now is just give you a brief overview and you can bring up any issues that you feel are important. And I can either carry them back as part of our public comments or you can at least take it as information and give to us tomorrow too. Phase 1 of this Corridor Study was completed in 1999 and 2000, and the plan there was to look at coordinating the improvements with the interstate and the arterial system in both Ada and Canyon Counties. That plan found that we needed to balance the transit system. That is that you could not do it by just widening the arterials, you could not fix it by just fixing the interstate, and you could do it by fixing both. We needed a transit system expansion and we also needed transition demand measures that is our other carpooling, ride sharing, work shift changes that type of deal. What I have done is I have given you a brief overview of the slides when I gave a talk to the COMPASS Board yesterday. You can read it at your convenience. We just want to hit some of the high points here. In the Phase 2 project, which we are doing now, we are focusing on 1-84. In Phase 1 we pretty much agreed on what the street system needed to be upgraded to, but there were a couple issues on interchanges on the interstate. And those interchange decisions unfortunately affected the traffic forecast on the mainline. So the location of a couple new interchanges and the widening of the mainline and then the order that we build them and how we are going to pay for them are really the focus of the second study. The specific design issues, I talk about the new interchanges. Everyone more or less has agreed and the state board has funded the improvement of the Carture interchange, which is on the west side of Nampa. Everyone more or less assumes that the Ten Mile Road is a done deal, and we were told not to reexamine that and to assume that it is in the model and in the plans. We expect that when we get to the last stages of this plan the Ten Mile Road interchange will be formally approved as part of that concept. So we are not reexamining Ten Mile Road interchange at all, it is assumed to be part of the plan. We are looking at whether to add a new interchange to Five Mile Road or not. You know that came up in the Bench Valley study back in 1995, and then in Phase 1 of the study there was a discussion of whether to build another interchange between Ten Mile Road and Garrity. That would be very close to the border between Canyon and Ada counties. We do a four mile segment in there because it goes Ten Mile Road, Black Cat, McDermott, Robinson, which is actually aligned with Star Road, and then Garrity. There was no other new interchanges that we were supposed to examine in this stage of the project, but once we make a decision on those interchanges then we of course we have impact done what the mainline is. The Robinson Road interchange we examined first because I guess it was a little bit simpler task. The group looked at the traffic forecast at either Robinson r - Meridian City Council Workshop March 20, 2001 Page 3 or McDermott, and Robinson was found to carry a ten times the number of cars in 20 years that McDermott was. In fact, McDermott had only about 1009 cars a day which is about half the number of cars that go into a Circle K. So really there was no need from a traffic standpoint to construct an interchange at McDermott. Star Road or Robinson Road, the two are in alignment, was found to carry over 11,000 cars a day, which is quite a large number of cars. You could probably handle 30,000 to 40,090 cars at a normal diamond interchange and 10,000 is easily within its capacities. The TVTD, this Treasure Valley transportation team, which is made up of a range of public officials and staff members, recommended that we stick with the Robinson Road or Star Road interchange because it carried a lot more cars. It also being close to Garrity serves as a reliever to the Garrity interchange. Anyone who has driven through Garrity at a peak time knows that it is darn near impossible to get off and on the interchange because Garrity is so congested. In fact the modeling forecasts are showing that there is no way to get any more cars than what is there now. The interchange just needs a full reconstruction. So part of the reason then for picking Robinson Road was it would act as a reliever to Garrity particularly if Robinson were built before Garrity was reconstructed. That way we would have an alternative route for traffic to go back and forth. Also Garrity serves a new BSU campus and the Auto Mall and the Cheese Factory and so on, so there is obviously a pretty good need for that. The plan is not to the point where we know how it will be financed or when it will be constructed at some time down the road certainly more than 20 years. But we have to know where they are going now so we can plan to save the space for the interchange, and we can forecast what is going to happen with the mainline in- between it. So the plan that you are going to see if you come to the open house tomorrow does show Robinson Road in it; however, since the final decisions by the COMPASS Board are not made, you still have plenty of time to comment or if you have a new issue for us we would love to hear that too. The Five Mile interchange was the more challenging one, and I am blessed with having to stand at that booth tomorrow for 4 hours hearing both sides of it. If you remember back in 1995, the Bench Valley study examined the whole Bench area of Ada County. In fact I worked at ACRD at the time, so I was intimately involved with it for years and years. At that time we thought there would only be 40,000 cars a day. It would cost about $25 million dollars to build it, and by building Five 111'lile interchange it would have a significant impact on reducing traffic at Cole Road, Franklin Road, Milwaukee, and so on. Time flies. We have a new model now, and the new mile for 2020 has new demographics. Your planning director in fact sits on our on Demographic Advising Committee to help us forecast what the land use growth is and help us figure out what the future traffic forecasts are. Well the 2020 numbers now are showing 55,000 cars a day instead of 40,000. We cannot get that to work with single -lane ramps anymore, and because there are so many cars in the Franklin Road area we are not really solving anything. Mlle are just shifting cars around. If you take some cars off of Franklin and put them in the new Five Mile interchange somebody else on Fairview just moves over to Franklin to fill up that empty space because Fairview is full of cars too. So we do not really solve the traffic issues on the arterial system. The last thing was the Y has changed considerably. Back in 1995 we thought the Y was going to look the same way it does now for a long time. If you go out there now you will see that there are new ramps everywhere. In fact to get from downtown out here to the west, there are two different on --ramps. One comes from the connector and one Meridian City council Workshop March 20, 2001 Page 4 comes from Franklin Road. All those maps extend so far west of Maple Grove road that we are almost to Five Mile Road anyway. We cannot fit an interchange in there very easily because we cannot get all the weaves and merges in a space that is so short. The normal federal standards are that you keep an interchange 2 -miles apart, which is why Eagle Road and Meridian Road are as far apart as they are. Because anybody who has been on there knows that it takes a long time for the weaves and merges especially when the traffic numbers are high. In order to make it work, we need all kinds of fancy ramps, and we need a wider mainline. There are 30,000 more cars a day on the mainline if we build that interchange, and the state would have to make it a 1 o -lane roadway plus the ramps instead of 5 -lane. To ►widen that you have to buy more land and take the houses out on each side and we are up to $57 million dollars. Even at that ►eve found that we could not make it a safe interchange so the recommendation of the consulting firm which happens to be us said that it is too much of a cost. We cannot fit it in until we can meet all of the safety standards, and we recommend you drop it from the plan. The TVTT however recognized these concerns but felt there was a political reason to at least leave it in the plan for the Public Hearing and see how the general public felt. If you come to the open house tomorrow you will see that we do have the Five Mile Road interchange in there. We do play it down because of the concerns, but you could build anything if you throw enough cash at it. The last thing that we did, the part the effects you folks too other than the fact that we recommend the Ten Mile Road interchange or are maintaining the recommendation for the Ten Mile load interchange, is that we do need to reconstruct the Meridian Road interchange. Anyone who has been through there knows that it is only 4 -lanes line. There is no sidewalk for the kids, and there is so many cars that you cannot get back and forth on there. I live in Kuna and I drive through there every night and two or three lights is the norm. What we recommended that the state do is build a loop -ramp for westbound to southbound travel. So when you are headed out of Boise to Kuna for example, just happens to benefit me, instead of going up the off -ramp, hitting the light and turning left, you will go underneath and make a U turn on a loop --ramp to head south. We need an extra lane and since we have to widen the bridge anyway or replace it, we said we should go to 5 -lanes and put the pedestrian facilities on it. Part of that plan then would put a traffic signal at the southern ramp terminal. There is long fines getting off of that off -ramp and sometimes there has been up to 25 cars in a Q, and sometimes people have to wait 20-25 minutes to get off. Although it does not affect this town as much, we are also recommending a full reconstruction of the Garrity interchange. The thing is old. There is only room for 3 -lanes underneath; it needs 5 -lanes, and in the short term we can probably live with it. But certainly within 10 years the thing has to come down. There just are not enough lanes there. We are also playing with a plan to build what is called a fly -over from westbound to southbound. So you are going from Nampa to here for example you will not get off the off -ramp to light and turn left, you will go on a ramp, go up in the air over the whole interchange and come down and join Garrity by the hospital. That will take two lanes of cars out of the interchange and really save things. There is a way to actually build that now so that when the interchange gets reconstructed later we will not have to come down. You can do that for about $5 million dollars, which is a heck of a lot less than the $2o million it costs to rebuild the interchange. The final part of the plan is that we are calling for the need to reduce travel. That is the further expansion of the transit system, carpool, ride sharing, off- Meridian C'�Y Council Workshop March 20, 2001 Page 5 peak work trips, that type of deal. That is always part of every pian. It is always a lot cheaper to take a car off the road than a road to put the car on. What I wanted to bring to you then is those high points of what the plan is Involved with, remind you about the open house tomorrow, lots of displays and things. You have a little hand- out there that you can read some of the key points from, and let you know that we will probably be coming back to you folks sometime in June to let you know what kind of plan we have come with following all of the public input process. one of the key things for you folks to help us with is how to prioritize these projects. We are looking at in the range of $500 million dollars if you include west of the Y and east of the Y, which is more than any of us is going to make all week. And it is going to be a real fight to figure out which is the one to build first. So we will be coming back to folks in June or so with that concept plan. That is the end of my brief presentation this afternoon. Do you have any comments or questions for me at this time? Bird; Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Dave, you know your saying, I am not for the Five Mile interchange in anyway, but you say you like to stay 2 miles apart. I see Robinson Road or Star Road and Garrity being worse coning on, getting off. If you are going to say the 2 -mile deal, McDermott is the ideal thing. You are going to give Nampa with the Carture deal; you are giving the five interchanges. We cannot get one. I think it is going to wind up being very expensive if you go to the Robinson Boulevard, and it is going to be a traffic nightmare. If you look at your mileage, you will have more distance between the end of the interchange and the start of the Five Mile then you will from the end of the on or off -ramp at Robinson to the on or off -ramp at Garrity Boulevard. They have already taken Garrity and halfway down that mile is a 2 --lane exit. I cannot see hove that is very good planning for future. I would think that regardless of the traffic I know is heavy on Robinson right now, but you get the interchange on McDermott; it will get heavy. A lot of people are going to come down Star/Robinson Road and swing off, get on the interchange and go to Garrity and flip off instead of taking the Franklin Road. So you have cars merging in from Boise trying to get off at the same time and these getting on and off. That is the one plan that I do not think is practical to be truthful with you. Splet: You are closer to the truth than you think because we were just talking to the state about that, how to build it, and some of their traffic folks do not think that it is buildable either for the same points that you brought up. As a consultant we are sort of trapped because the Committee wants one thing and we have to march it through. So that is a good comment if you can come and add it to us tomorrow or you have done it now because I have already kept track of it. Thank you. Bird: I have one other comment. You said that Ten Mile was assumed to be still in the plan. Splet: our instructions were to leave it in the plan, leave it in the model and reexamine it. Meridian City Council Workshop March 20, 2001 Page 6 Bird: Okay, it better stay there I hope. I would like to see it number one on the plan. Splet: In fact, that is one of the things you folks should consider too because there are only so many dollars, and if it all goes to Five Mile you could build three other interchanges for the price of that one. Because your one here, we could probably do that. The ramps would be fairly cheap. The bridge is difficult to replace. I understand there is a chance for some private funds to help accelerate that now. Bird: But what is the Ten Mile estimate now for price? Splet: $15 to $20 million. Bird: And what is Robinson? Splet: About the same thing, a little more. Robinson is a little tougher because of the point that you came up with. It is only a mile from Garrity which means you have to add an extra lane to the mainline for the weaving and merging, so you have to buy extra land and build that in there too. one of the long term things that we are not up to yet is we have to figure out what is going to happen with Highway 16. You probably know that Senator Bunderson really wants that examined. I do not think it is going to be possible to bring it down Ten Mile Road. So it will probably end up at Black Cat or someplace between Black Cat and McDermott, and if we get too far west of that then we may only end up with one interchange in the long term. But there are too many other issues to solve first. We have not figured out what the best point is. General rule if there is no bridge or anything in a site now it costs about $2o to $25 million to build a new interchange, If you have a bridge and some roads the price drops. A good place to start is $15 million or so to $25 depending upon... Bird: Thank you very much Dave. Splet: My pleasure. De Weerd: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mrs. de Weerd. De Weerd: Dave, are we also considering the overpass at Linder? Are you doing just interchanges or are you also looking at overpasses? Splet: Linder was not part of our task. I understand ACHD it would be their road and no interchange. That was not part of our scope because what would happen if that were built it effects the mile roads on either side, Ten Mile or Meridian Road in this case. Same thing as the Locust Grove Bridge is. We are not looking at that because there is no interchange. De Weerd: Okay. Meridian City Council Workshop� March 20, 2001 Page 7 Splet: Did I remember to say that the mainline that we are also recommending be B- lanes from Meridian Road to the Y? And then 8 -lanes west of there all the way to Caldwell and then 4 -lanes through Caldwell and out. Bird: How much more frontage on each side of the road would we have to purchase at that time Dave if it goes 8 -lanes? Splet: We Can get 8 -lanes by putting it in the middle. Bird: oh, okay, we would not have the -- Splet: We do not need more land until we -get to the 9th and .loth lane. Bird: Okay. Splet: We just have to build one of those small walls in the middle. We can go inwards. Bird: Good. Splet: So we do not have to buy any land. Corrie: Anything else? De Weerd: No, thank you very much. Bird: Thank you very much. Splet: Thank you and hopefully we will see one or all of you tomorrow night. Corrie: Thank you Dave. Thank you Mary. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Before we start the other meeting I would move that we go into Executive Session as per code 57-2345B. De Weerd: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to go into Executive Session. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Meridian City council Workshop March 28, 2001 Rage 8 Corrie: Before we start we tonight there is a sign up sheet in the hack if you want to testify for any one of the Public Hearings, you need to put your name on it so we can go by that sheet. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: 1 move that we come out of Executive Session. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to come out of Executive Session. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we close the special meeting. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded to close the special meeting. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: THREE AYES, ONE ABSENT MEETING ADJOURNED AT 7:05 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ROj3tRT D. CORRIE, MAYOR ATTEST: w zg BESWILLIAM G. BER JR.R TY LE K To: Mayor & Council From:Gary D. Smith, PE CC: file I Planning & Zoning Date: 03/10/01 Re: 1.84 Corridor Study RECEIVED MAR 12 2001 CITY OF MERIDSAN On Wednesday, March 21, 2001, 4:00 PM to 8:00 PM, an open house meeting will be held at the Meridian Convention Center, 200 E. Carlton, to discuss the 1-84 Corridor Study. The two attached meeting announcement papers were handed out at the last Treasure Valley Transportation Team meeting. This study is regional in nature in that it includes Ada and Canyon Counties. The issues being studied include; future interchange locafions• widening of the interstate widenin f roadwa s oaralleling I- 84• mass transit: and other means of traffic management. This is an important study with far reaching effects. l would encourage you to attend to review the results of the study and offer any comments you may have. Sincerely, i1c Prnmthe deskof... Gary cuyD. sem,, PE Mardian amity Fagg Meridian Public Works Department 200 E CarllpnSt, Suite 100 Meadia, Iciaho 83642-2600 0 Page I (2M W 2211 Fax (") 887-1.297 city.of Meridian Public Works Dept. To: Mayor & Council From:Gary D. Smith, PE CC: file I Planning & Zoning Date: 03/10/01 Re: 1.84 Corridor Study RECEIVED MAR 12 2001 CITY OF MERIDSAN On Wednesday, March 21, 2001, 4:00 PM to 8:00 PM, an open house meeting will be held at the Meridian Convention Center, 200 E. Carlton, to discuss the 1-84 Corridor Study. The two attached meeting announcement papers were handed out at the last Treasure Valley Transportation Team meeting. This study is regional in nature in that it includes Ada and Canyon Counties. The issues being studied include; future interchange locafions• widening of the interstate widenin f roadwa s oaralleling I- 84• mass transit: and other means of traffic management. This is an important study with far reaching effects. l would encourage you to attend to review the results of the study and offer any comments you may have. Sincerely, i1c Prnmthe deskof... Gary cuyD. sem,, PE Mardian amity Fagg Meridian Public Works Department 200 E CarllpnSt, Suite 100 Meadia, Iciaho 83642-2600 0 Page I (2M W 2211 Fax (") 887-1.297 I . -1 I . .- . 11" . . - I . - t.. I ­ - I I . ". , IITEC ,-� .. .III - - F I . .- ., " I - . . _. .1 I � � . . - . � : •' }, ' i t •' i' ;.?rte' ' r.*-f'r :' :"� . . :. � f. . I : -��� . . }.." to _• .,tea:. ,.. , - - :"�l � -�w ��}} . ` ,ham ;` l.. 4,.� �' 7 r�' - � -A r' 4 3f' 1, . ��� 1, �� � .00, r f�' mow. � � r� r:•i ry 1 � � r� .rti:t � � v1;� .* j i� �, � f � III .�, . , ..., j-� '��" - , ,.S r i ii ::.S..L. ..M, ..Ya `t' {..._]- "!% .ti=.i i^r�. .y...5y�)r.. I y 1y .e ''� - }�S.t. a ;�., ',j* r i t. � r . ."* � Vi.i� ,z.'. :y , fir.,, . A- k. 7 1 / I - 'A , Y f #. ,• ' IL, _ A `x s rte' a` '.{ ;. xi: _ _­ !, 1. I .,:. .1� 'I . - {' - }sr 1. ... - - . �.. " . . .. . . I I ... I ...:. 0 _ . . _.., . - /_ ,' • . I . . , , . . 1. . . /,. , . . P �.... P NY � - - �..,.._ � _. . I ., I A On 4� �) . 44 2 �;"W"4�-�"".5"�-w- thk!�' -AL �_% _W . ._. .. C 4 C . . 1. . - , I I , I . .. I . . - ..... T '?,.'. �: 1:11" , . �_ .,. I - - _. I . . I . , . ..- �,_ ''. . ... - ..- � _- , - - . ­,�i- - I I - . I . . t• _ . - _.. , - .. ­­ : I - . I .. . . . . �11 11 � .-. . I - . ... I I . .. : - - �,-. -.. � . '.. , . . I .1. .. t .. _- - IIIZ!�. ­ ­_ ,-. . .. . � . I.- . - . ?.1 . .. .., . . . �.r _ � . . . 'Z.' t. - . I . . � .--!1 _.,F. .. _.. - I - - . I ,­ . '' . , - . - - � . ; I !..: ,� , � I.. . 1.. . . . . 1, - , - . .. � F, ". ­- _, � ... - . ,,- - ", I'. �.. g 4 . ,� 1-1 -- " - 1, *, . � - -1 -1 .� . . '' .1 -, - - - ,_ . . . . I ''.. ,�'. . . . - �: ... . .. ... - " I - ,i'. . � .." . . . I ".. __ . . I -,...,--.. ." _. - . I _... .1 ... 11 � '. I I... ,�. ..,_ . � . . . . . . - ,�- - -1....-C; . . '­i�. .,:. I . .� ...._,.. "�_ - " - . 1� - , V. , - , . I I � -� I,- ­ . - . , '. - . . . I ­. `'R � . � .. _.� 1.-r � ,I - I -is .,�, - 1.- ., `r:•_ _... - , - .- + ,.. � . 77� � . I. . -.,. ". ` '-;�_,�,., - I _�_� : �- �: �� .::::r ;,� " Z., - -- - "-* _z ,� - . . - -_ '_ - .- , ......- I .. "..- -.-.... - . . - ., '' ., 11 " ::. I..r,..- , n- _... - . , . . . - I _". �,- . . " . I � 11, : . �� � ..."'. . . . � � . . I. - - .. . . I . _ry I. .1 . . .-.Y. _may •! •r��_; _.� •.: I-84 CORRID-OR.STUDY OPEN HOUSE The Treasure Valley Transportation Team is holding a public open house for the next phase of the 0-84 Corridor Study. We are looking for comments on interchange selections and traffic, management tions. AIDA7CAWYVN COUnTY -- Ke6io�A L. CORRIDOR DECISIONS ♦Widening I-8 4? ♦ Robinson or McDermott Interchange? *Five Mile Interchange In or Out? Carpool Lanes'. ♦ Mass Transit? Open House Wednesday,, March 21,, 2001 4OOpm to 8:10opm Meridian Convention Center 200 East Carlton Meridian, Idaho For more information, please contact Mollie McCarty Idaho Transportation Department (208) 334-8003 t CjEi ED MAR 2 0 2001 1 CITY OF MERIDIAN e11e1?1-21p--ll u N1 I-84 Corridor Study Final Phase for the Meridian City Council Meeting March 20, 2001 Washington DAVFF) EVANS AND A-S50CIATEs.U23M I t Phase 1 Cmiclusions • "No --build" was not an acceptable option • Need capacity improvements for both arterial and freeway expansion • Also needed a combination of strategies, including TDM and ITS • Maintain 25% goal for rideshare Interchange priorities = Karcher (1), Ustick (2), and Middleton (3) Washington I-84 Corridor Shady- Phase 1 Completed in 2000 • Background: Multi -agency, long ran;e, planning effort Significant public involvement Develop and refine alternatives - Decisions on some new interchange Iocations - Define improvements to I-84 mainline - Define improvements to the arterial system 4 I-84 Corridor Study- Final Phase Current Work Tasks • Build on the previous analysis (Phase 1) • Develop implementation program for I-84 improvements • Establish regional priorities • Develop financial/funding plan • Include TDM and ITS strategies I-84 Corridor Study- Final Phase -Design and Purpose - • Specific Design/Review Elements - Five Mile Load interchange - - New interchange between Garrity Blvd and Ten Mile Rd - Transportation Remand Management Plan (TDM) Robinson Rd/McDermott Rd Interchange • Purposes: Determine potential for new interchange location - Garrity Blvd to Ten Mile Rd - Determine location of new interchange • Goads: - Recommend location or Recommend further study or No interchange in the plan 5 7 DRAFT TDM Plan • Achieve 25% goal • Methods: Decrease peak hour travel demand - Reduce or eliminate certain trips - Shift from single -occupant vehicles • Strategies: - Administrative Measures - Economic IVleasures - Supply-side Changes - Information Systems 2 � � � �.«� ------may �L�ryrw 3. INION PACI L RAILROAD ` rtz FRANKLIN RD TA)AM LN s ~_ �-- o - _ V£RLANp RD 8�4 RP RT Cr LPQWERLINE RD } v _T ' E EXHIBIT -r ROBLVsaV R0,1D :iNL) .lfCDEJ.tW('_)1T Ra4D 1►NrrhRC1L-iNC; ::4RL4. I - ; 0.177 s•`i*' .; _ yy #ten .�....n [.t��. ri' I r,�(.•.tA4NL. •r•He :wt.+. •.'x:r:x. 2 Traffic Elements Robinson Road w 11,000 VPD in Year 2020 • Reduced Congestion at Garrity Blvd • Regional connection to the north (Star Road) • Conuniercial land uses in the area Summary and Conclusions - Robinson/McDermott interchange - Robinson Road - $27 Million • Serves more traffic • Closer to Garrity Blvd/Mitigation • Access to activity centers and growth McDermott Road - $25 Million Serves less traffic Farther from Garrity Blvd - Less access to activity centers and growth - May lead to new land use plans Traffic Elements McDermott Road • 1,100 VPD in Year 2020 •Minor Impact on Garrity Blvd No regional connection to the north Mostly rural access to the south Residential land uses in the area lu Initial TVTT Course o f Action Robinson Road/McDermott Road • New interchange justified by: - lack of good north -south connection need to relieve Garrity Blvd congestion • Plan for interchange in the Robinson Road area under existing land use plan • Consider other alternatives if new land use plan is developed. 91 �F Five Mile Interchange • Review Previous Bench -Valley Study (1995) Report Determine Potential For Five Mile Road Interchange • Goal: Reject, Accept or Remand for Further Research Current COMPASS Analysis Based upon Year 2020 Forecast • 55,000 vehicles per day • Modify arterial traffic volumes and congestion • Widen Five Mile Road to five lanes •Interchange cost of $57 million • Ramp/mainline = $12 million • Right of Way = $21 million Bench -Valley Study Based upon Year 2015 Forecast * 41,000 vehicles per day • Reduce arterial traffic volumes and congestion • Widen Five Mile Road to five lanes Interchange cost of $25 million Washington 17 . r -• fRw►�.W RW G ...... ... ..-W DL 1; •Yl •� ..� • .. RA3�7y7UfE7J�y�+ .. - . 4 �.111 r r - �►�� UIIIG,AK,C A•# IAA&r A-4 OtAA4P J4 RAW 64t it JPAO A I LAW f-0 � ��. :�. �: .Ss •� yr ! CCkE 10%1A[Aw, �' = pVCI1�,Irid � � _J�:� 2 Proposed Interchange vs {r No Interchange • Interchange attracts plenty of traffic • Freeway volume goes up by 30,000 ADT • Freeway lanes increase by 4 Little change in VMTIVHT (< -.1 %) • Little change in speed (c +.I%) • Little change in CO (< -.1%) • Little change in PM 10 (< -.1%) jul v' Roadway Design Issues - Five Mile Road - B -V Study done before current Wye Design Current Wye design has new ramp locations Wye ramps extend far west of Maple Grove Original weaving areas are now far too short. • Design cannot ttteet safety standards. Proposed Interchange vs No Interchange Summary • Benefits of interchange are small but the cost is high • No solution to arterial congestion • Requires 4 additional lanes on I-84 Mainline • Design can not meet safety standards. Course of Action • Omit Five Mile Interchange from Plan? or • Other action? ;4 FRANKLIN RD — Cr LU s� ALTERNATIVE RAMP �.....:.... .......... • r a- - ..,� DELETE RAUP Cr E I," _ »_> LIJ !! . • E.- .._..� L_..- !OVERLAND R4 r,xr-rr���•r � ,� Il: MI' 1W'SIGN 411 T1:R?'.'/17TI7,S Z r�E ir7t`� „r{ . i .4nntherConsultant Stt:V►V.S: LiI�T�1.a, .___.___��vt.,�r-tr�.1 .T. .. --. �.,f T � � � Proposed Interchange vs {r No Interchange • Interchange attracts plenty of traffic • Freeway volume goes up by 30,000 ADT • Freeway lanes increase by 4 Little change in VMTIVHT (< -.1 %) • Little change in speed (c +.I%) • Little change in CO (< -.1%) • Little change in PM 10 (< -.1%) jul v' Roadway Design Issues - Five Mile Road - B -V Study done before current Wye Design Current Wye design has new ramp locations Wye ramps extend far west of Maple Grove Original weaving areas are now far too short. • Design cannot ttteet safety standards. Proposed Interchange vs No Interchange Summary • Benefits of interchange are small but the cost is high • No solution to arterial congestion • Requires 4 additional lanes on I-84 Mainline • Design can not meet safety standards. Course of Action • Omit Five Mile Interchange from Plan? or • Other action? ;4 Improvements to Existing Interchanges • Meridian Road new loop ramp for West to South ...widen bridue • Garrity Blvd ...reconstruct ...add fly -over for West to South • Franklin Road (CJS 20126) ... reconstruct What Is Today's Message? • Relay information on current project status • Notice of Open House meeting on March 21 • Identify opportunity for jurisdictional briefings • Plan for your May review of public meeting results goImprovements to I-84 Mainline - Within 20 Years - • Eight lanes - Wye to Meridian Road • Six Lanes — Meridian Road to Ustick Road • Four Lanes West of Ustick Road I-84 Corridor Study- Final Phase - Next Steps - • Review public input (starts in March) • Develop phasing and financial plans • Prepare a draft/final corridor plan • COMPASS Board and iTD Board .Adoption 0Washing ton DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES.® on CU P 1 — L, --A0 10 a 0 0 a 3 r. M�� o 0 �Q 0 a :0)u �n 3 0 G c [ti s � W cr a �M 0 0 M 0 :3 0 0 =3E -r= as Cn cr D &l.. 0 m m0 � [7 - 9i pt R -43 [D -� 0 30 m rooto 0 0 0- C7 0 0 + CDD 5S CD r 9�9� So o - �••r V J co CD CD •�• m Vol rx 00 0 0 N m � -6 m J (Q- m ? cQ � z a ° a CL Q 0 *0� R. v L C � D m a m �� 8 St CD CD m > 0 9 coo a A*2:-a 3 0 jr =. 0 r_ �i17 VJm CU P 1 — L, --A0 10 a 0 0 a 3 r. M�� o 0 �Q 0 a :0)u �n 3 0 G c [ti s � W cr a �M 0 0 M 0 :3 0 0 ca v r � t7 c sZ a (1) Cn ca 0 o m0 � [7 - al 9 m R sm rr [D -� 0 30 m rooto 0 0 0- C7 0 0 + CDD Z m 0 cc 0 cG CD 0 a0 CD cn So o - OD V J co •�• m n 0 -0CD0� m� 00 Z m � -6 3 ? cQ � z a ° a 0m� Q v L Crm a m �� 8 St CD coo CD 0 0 r_ (.1" CL -4 OD C) rV FL v v � ..� v � m (.n C) a :3 t7 a 1 v ° ur a: CL CL 0 _ a m a n a 0 CD ch 0ID 0 v 0 0) o 0 0 as 0) n v) v N N 0 0 a �• rt Z 0 � 5? 0 0 ro(D 4� }. U m y -� a. Jj m J 0 a ca v r � t7 c sZ a 0 CCD m m 0 �,a CL -0n 0 [7 0 � CD 3 ccnn D) (C) al 9 m C) 6 0.,CD 0 cn w rf m. m +A Q [D -� 0 30 m rooto 0 0 0- C7 0 0 + CDD Z m 0 cc 0 cG CD 0 a0 CD 0 �, cQ So n @ rrAA V+ So o c OD (D m n 0 00 0 C m � -6 3 ? cQ � z a ° a a) Q v L Crm St CD coo 0 (Ln (.1" to -4 OD C) rV 0 v a� L" v v (.n C) a v a a v v V CL CL 0 v a b a 0 a 0 0 v 0 0) a 0 as 0) n v) v N N ca v r � t7 c sZ a 0 CCD m m 0 = CG w v 0 Q ON °fool, C 3 0 '� 0 to cn y 70 0 CD cn 0 � CD 3 ccnn D) (C) 0 P-4.0 °�. �a C) 6 0.,CD 0 cn w rf m. m C)� v o 0 �. ?L ::Eo- 0 cy a -� 0 30 m rooto 0 0 0- C7 0 0 + CDD Z m 0 cc 0 cG CD 0 a0 CD 0 �, cQ So n @ rrAA V+ So rn0z o•� 4NL OD OD OD OD 00 0 C rn rn ? cQ � N OD CD rn St CD coo 0 (Ln (.1" to -4 OD C) rV 0 v N) L" v v 0a0 --I (D Oo 00 OD OD OD OD �° ;v: t° rn0z o•� 4NL OD OD OD OD 00 ❑ rn rn ? � N OD rn St T coo 0 (Ln (.1" to -4 OD C) rV 0 v N) L" v v (.n (.n cn v a a v v ca 0 0 v a b a o a 0 0 v 0) a 0 as 0) 0) v) v 0a0 --I (D :3 ID 0 �° ;v: t° rn0z o•� Q• o ��-n CA) v�aa 14 zS � —n�rn L = ❑ rn rn ? N rn Q G) T 0 0 v c 0 o � A 3 00 =r :'iF-0. o on �- L •• o a • cr $ rn 0 z rn 0 rn N 0 0 a �• rt Z 0 � 5? 0 0 ro(D a m 0 CL 0 m m m 0 l< 9 CD -9 �v m INJ No W fl. 0 --1 0 m n n Q n Q rn rn rn rn rn _ z rn 8 c D p Z ❑ ❑ go = 0 IV N ? C ni cn rn > rn z z ccnn -� i�• L3 -� Q1 � i (il G G7 N 0 y !A � y -4 df i i 00 T Q U1 i V 0 (n V N Q1 N I 1-1-14 9 � y V �7 A0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v o v 0 0 0 v 0 0 a v 0 0 0 0 0 0 v 0 a 8 S$$ 9$$ 9 S S g m � G C D N 0 3 T a m �m R 3 TL 2. 9 -n o > 0 .� Cr �. o � u Zwry. m 0 ;u M 0 v_ o W rn ❑ rn � 0 o � 0 m g a2 � N � 3 0 0 cr �Z 3 Cr CD 8 Q i 0 i TO: CITY OF MERIDIAN PARKS DEPARTMENT LIEN WAVER (Final Payment) PROJECT: GENERATIONS PLAZA PHASE 2 FROM: WRIGHT BROTIERS, THE BUILDING COMPANY DATE: APRIL 23, 2001 PAYMENT REQUESTED: $4,062.75 In consideration of payments received to date and upon actual receipt of the FINAL PAYMENT, the undersigned does hereby waive, release and relinquish any and all claim and/or right of lien against the PROJECT and the real property and improvements thereto for labor and/or materials furnished for use in construction of said PROJECT; excepting only those pending claims described as: None WRIGHT BROTHERS, THE BUILDING COMPANY BY: SignatIl TITLE: I-All"t )/�S DATE: yL— a--.3 — o/ STATE OF IDAHO ) f ) ss: County of �' ) (/1 t T � ■ f On this day of , 20before me, personally appeared the individual who signed the foregoing waiver, being known to me, and acknowledged that he executed the foregoing instrument and that the execution was the voluntary act and deed of the above-named company. Further, if the company is a corporation, the said individual certified that he is an officer duly authorized to execute the same on behalf of such corporation. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I ha�tri :set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate last above written. ' a r I 1 6TkR P LIC for Idaho , Residing at i , Idaho u• ,, _ �t f Commission gyres: March 16, 2001 Department Report MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 20, 2001 APPLICANT Gary Smith ITEM NO. 4-B-1 REQUEST Will -serve letter relating to land owned by W.H. Moore at Ustick and Eagle Roads AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: !MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US VILEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS See previous item packet City of Meridian ' Public WoRECEIVEIrrks Dept.MAR 19 2001 CITE" OF IVIS RIl LAN To: Mayor & council From:Gary D. Smith, PE CC: file Date: 03/1010/ Re: Sanitary sewer service to W.H. Moore Property -- Ustick Road 1 Eagle Road I have reviewed the invert elevations shown on the concept development plan submitted to me by Jonathan Seel of the W.H. Moore company. Mr. Seel also provided a topographic map to me for the northerly most 12+ acres recently acquired by Mr. Moore, which is the subject of the transfer request from Boise city to Meridian Area of Impact. Using the information on the concept development plan and the topographic map for the 12+ acres, it appears that W.H. Moore's entire 50+ acre parcel will gravity sewer into a future sewer line to be built in Ustick Road. The elevation of the Ustick Road sewer was determined by extending the South Slough sewer on its proposed alignment to Leslie Drive in carol Subdivision and then extending 10 -inch diameter sewer line in Leslie Drive north to Ustick and then east toward Eagle Road. Res ctfully - - . ... . a Gary s Page 1 F VV .......... .... ... . . ........... . . . . . ........ ... ... . . ... ........ ....... .. . . .......... ...... .............. .... . . . .. .. . .... . . ............ .... . . . ........... . .... . . . ........ . .. ..... . ..... ... .... . .............. ... .... ... .. .. ....... .. . . . ................ ....... . . .. f "ir t. ,W.H. MOORS XAYORS -, C C M P A N Y CITY o-F.,,VT. Real Estate Development TELEPHONE (208) 323-19191 FAX 323-7523 600 N. STEELHEAD WAY, SUITE 144 (83704) P.O. BOX 8204 BOISE, IDAHO 83747-2204 March 11, 2001 Mayor Robert Corrie Members of Meridian City Council City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho Re: Northwest Corner of Ustick and Eagle Road Dear Mayor and Council Members: RECEIVED MAR - 1 2001 CITY OF MERIDIAN As requested at the February 20`� Meridian City Council hearing, I have enclosed the letter from Mayor Brent Coles to the Board of Ada County Commissioners requesting to renegotiate the Boise City impact area. The Mayor, Boise City Council and Ada County Commissioners met on Tuesday, February 27th and agreed that the area of impact could be renegotiated, that is the Impact Ordinance can be amended (please let me know if you would like a copy of the minutes once they become available). As I understand it, if Meridian agrees to the Will Serve Utility Letter and modifying the impact area, the next step will be the formal approval process with Meridian, Boise and Ada County. In other words, until we receive a decision from Meridian no further action will be taken. On a related issue I have given Gary Smith the information we used to determine if the proposed Ustick sewer can serve the land within the Boise impact area. Please feel free to call should you have any questions. Sinc e y onathan R. Seel cc: Gary Smith, City of Meridian, wlencl. 01 S E. R BRM COLFS C I T Y a 6 TRE E MATOR OFFICE of THE MAYOR . February 2I, 2001 Board of Ada County Coa=issioners 650 W. Main Stmet Boise, Idaho 83702 Re: Request to Renegotiate the Boise City Area of Impact Boundary Dear Conunissioners: W, H. Moore Company recently requcsted input from the Boise City Council on a proposal to remove apQ roximately 12 acres of a 58-,a cm parcel from the Boise City Area of impact and the incorporated area of the City. The subject property is located on the northwest corner of Eagle and Ustick Roads. Approximately I ? acres in the northeast corner of the property are within the Boise Arca of Impact and corpordtc limits, while the balance is within the Meridian Area of Inxpact.. The owner plans to develop a business park and prefers that all of the property be within one city junsdiction. The Council reviewed the request on February 13, 2001 and concluded that it was a fair and mmnable request and it would be appropriate to submit the request to Ada County. The owner has been advised that the governing boards of Ada County and Boise City roust hold a negotiation meeting and if agement 3s reached, the actual boundary change must go through the hearing process by each jurisdiction. In accordance with the Ada County -Disc City Area of Impact Agreement and Idaho Code Section 67-6526(d), Boise City homby request a meeting to macgotiatc the Boise City Area of Impact boundary as requested by the W. H. Moore Company. In accordance with the renegotiation process, a meeting shall occur within 30 days of receipt of this request To faci3itate a timely renegotiation meeting, this issue can be placed on the City Council noon meeting agenda for Febnwy 27, 20013, if that time and date is convenient for the Commissioners. If the Commissioner's schedule does not allow a meeting at that time, please let me know a date and time that will work for you.- va ly yours, H. Brent Coles Mayor encs. cc: Boise City Council Jeff patlovich, Director, Ada County Development Sctvices crry HALT • 150 NORTH CAMOL BODUVARD ' P.O. @X 500v A01SS, IDAHO 83701-0SW * 208nG i 44n & PAX 2W/384 420 An ZgUd OPPOMWAY F )W aromad=NPWW45 February 16, 2001 Department Report AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: � CITY ATTORNEY / CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: II CITY BUILDING DEPT: / CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: Date: Phone: Materials presented at p011a meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. W,H. MOORE C O M P A N Y Real Estate Development � TELEPHONE (20e) 323-1919 i Fax 323ae23 000 N. STEELHEAD WAY, SUITE 144 (83704) P.O. BOX 8204 BOISE, IDAHO 83707.2204 February 15, 2001 Crary Smith City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho Re: Ustick and Eagle Road Dear Gary: RECEIVED FEB 15 2001 GrrY OF MERIDA' Attached is a letter we have submitted to the Mayor and City Council regarding expanding the area of impact for Meridian and request for a Will Serve Letter relating to land owned by Winston Moore at the referenced location. At the direction of Will Berg, I am asking that you present this item, along with any other information you deem appropriate, at the February 20t` City Council hearing. Thanks for your assistance. Sincere , J athan R. Seel W.H. MOORS C O M P A N Y Real Estate Development 600 N. STEELHEAD WAY, SUITE 144 (83704) P.O. BOX 8244 BOISE, IDAHO 83707-2204 February 15, 2001 Mayor Robert Corrie Members of Meridian City Council City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho Dear Mayor and Council Members: TELEPHONE (208) 323-1919 J FAX 323-7523 RECEIVED FEB 15 2001 CITY OF MERIDIAN Winston Moore has acquired three contiguous parcels of unimproved land at the northwest corner of Ustick and Eagle Road, which total approximately 57.84 acres. Mr. Moore has acquired this land with the intent of developing a business park with an interior road system. Of this total land area, approximately 12.23 acres are in Boise City limits and the balance is in the City of Meridian impact area. I have enclosed a site map illustrating the impact line separating the two jurisdictions. Given this somewhat unusual situation, we recently asked Mayor Coles and the Boise City Council for their opinion on adjusting the impact line so that all of Mr. Moore's land is solely in the Meridian area of impact. Simply put, we asked Boise to transfer approximately 12.23 acres to the impact area for the City of Meridian. This week they commented that it was "fair and reasonable" to adjust the impact line. Please bear in mind their decision was not a formal approval but their position regarding commencing a formal approval process through Planning & Zoning and City Council. With the understanding that Boise would not oppose transferring this land to the Meridian area of impact, we are now submitting this letter requesting Meridian's preliminary feedback on accepting this land and also providing a Will Serve Utility Letter for the entire 57.84 acres of land. If time permits we would make ourselves available at your City Council meeting on Tuesday, February 20, 2001. The basis for requesting the Will Serve Letter is this land is in the area of impact but not within the City limits. We understand the City generally requires the land be annexed before water and sewer services are provided to the landowner. However, at this time there is no adjoining land within the City limits therefore there is no path for annexation. We are certainly willing to pursue annexation when it becomes available, and in fact are willing to make this a condition to the City issuing a Will Serve Letter. (As a side note, Pinnacle Engineers has determined the proposed Ustick sewer line can serve the 12.23 acres.) With respect to utilities, water is in Ustick and as we understand it sewer should be available by the first of next year. th Winston Moore envisions a first class business park at the intersection of Ustick and Eagle and hopes to begin construction in 2002 under the assumption sewer and water will be available this year. However, without the City's cooperation our hands are tied and the best we can do is farm this land in the Meridian area, and since utilities are available to the Boise land, submit a development application for the 12.23 acres. We trust you will assist us in developing a quality project in Meridian. Assuming the Mayor and Council respond favorably on both the impact line modification and Will Serve Letter, we will begin the formal approval process with Meridian, Boise and Ada County to adjust the area of impact boundary. Mayor Robert Come Members of Meridian Cit incil City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Ave. Meridian, Idaho Page 2 Thank you for your consideration of this matter and we will look forward to meeting with you at your convenience. ;inc n R Seel cc: Gary Smith, City of Meridian CITY OF MERIDIA i TOTAL ACREAGE 57.84 CITY OF BOISE ACREAGE = 12.23 + CITY OF MERIDIAN ACREAGE = 45.61 ± I CITY OF BOISE s d W J Q W USTICK ROAD ------ — — PARCEL MAP USTICK AND EAGLE ROAD \�=v Nacre-+ March 16, 2001 Department Report MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 20, 2001 APPLICANT Gary Smith ITEM NO. 4-B-3 REQUEST Nahas -Central Valley Corporate Park -Landscape Irrigation AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT.- SANITARY ISTRICT:SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US VILEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See attached Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. aef . To. Mayor & Council Fro�:Gary D. Smith, PE CC: file Date 03/05/01 tie: Nahas — Central valley Corporate Park — Landscape Irrigation Bob & Ron Nahas, developers of this commercial subdivision, called me several weeks ago saying they were in the final stages of obtaining a well drilling permit from Idaho Department of Water Resources to provide irrigation water to most of the lots (attached sketch) in this subdivision during the time when ditch water is not available. Presently, the irrigation water needed when ditch water is not available is supplied by the City through a single paint connection far approximately 94,000 square feet of landscape area. Nahas has been assessed, and has paid (attached permit), $3,500 for this water demand. In conjunction with their application for an irrigation water well drilling permit, Nahas' are requesting refund of the $8500 that they paid to the City of Meridian for this water demand. Several times in the past, City Council has authorized return of water assessment funds to developers, who have paid into our "well development fund" in lieu of constructing a pressure irrigation system, and subsequently commit to install a pressure irrigation system to utilize ditch water. In the previous cases of requested refunds, I have sought City Council approval because of the amount of money involved and the nature of the request. In that regard, I am now requesting your input to this refund request. Mayor, I would appreciate this item being placed on the next available Council meeting agenda for discussion and or decision. From fhe dQsk off.. . Rega Gary 0 Page I Gary D. Smith, PE Meridian City Engineer Meridian PWAie Works DqmtPmt WO & Carlton St, Suite 100 MeridiaA Idaho &3642-2600 (208)887-2211 Fax ("} 8871297 I A O OL COMKIRATIK CW" FEB 13 0 1, .15:54:208 3366E61 PAGE. 02 j.. BUILDING PERMIT Issued: 9/12/96 Permit No: 16976 Conditions: OWNER/APPLICANT------------------------PROPERTY LOCATION------------------------ R.T.- ------------------------- R.T: NAHAS 1 S TRATFORD PARK 1 BATES BLVD ORINDA, CA 94553 Lot: Block: Lang Legal: 510/254-8800 sub: T. S: PaJ..e No: CONTRACTOR -----------------------------------DESIGNER------- ___-_--_------_-_--_-----_ PROPERTY OWNER WITHIN CITY LIMITS MERIDIAN, ID 83 642 208/000-0000 000/000-0000 PROJECT INFO -------------------------------------------------------------------- Prj Value: $0.00 S FD UNITS: 0 MFD UNITS: 0 Prj Type.- 'GRATER & METER S FD SQ FT: 0 MFD SQ FT : 0 Occ Type: COMMERCIAL Occ Group: Occ Load: COMMERCIAL: 0 Cnstr Type: INDUSTRIAL: 0 GARAGE: 0 Land Use: PROJECTNOTES--------------------------_.----_-_____---_----_----__-___--_---------- PROJECT FEES ASSESSMENT --------------------------------------------------------- Building Permit $0.00 ACHD IMPACT $0.00 -------------- $0.00 Plan Check $0.00 RE-APPLICATION $0.00 ----------------- $0.00 MOBILE HOME $4,00 -------------- $0.00 $0.00 FOUNDATION $0.00 -------------- $0.00 $0.00 R METER. TER HOO $2,200.00 ---------------- $81,50 - -- - - --•-�� $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 WAT LATECOMER .-_.�--w___-.�_-- $0.00 TOTAL FEE: $10,700.00 SEWER HOOKUP $0.00 --------------- $0.00 AMT PAID: $10,700.00 SEW LATECOMERS $0,00 -------------- $0.00 --------------- ------- IRES $0.00 -------------- $0.40 BAL DUE: $0.00 kxi, l l ct q - -Few . 2 oo t .._ ►� �� � - - [Yl� 52'.01401 =- 46$ oo o air r :ijEa. C) 3 t = 1 27q- cow alp . March 16, 2001 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Gary Smith REQUEST Easements - Bridgetower Subdivision Department Report March 20, 2001 AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR.- CITY IRECTOR:CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT.- CITY EPT:CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER.- US OWER:US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: Date: ITEM NO. 4-B-2 COMMENTS See atfached 6T,)ITC, V%j2--' 1 Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. .. N3� L27 77 "i To: Mayor Corrie Fronna Gary D. Smith, PE CC: fie Daft: 03/05/01 Re: Easements- Bridgetower Subdivision Mayor: Here is an easement document for water and sewer lines outside the platted area of the Sridgetower No, I Subdivision. The small-scale naps at the back of the easement packet graphically show where the easements are located. would appreciate it if you could place this easement request on the next available City Council agenda for review and approval by the Council. Thank you Gary 111117'��40� FmmM the desk of... Cay D. 5n * PE Meridian City Eang'x e Maidian FuWc Works "E Garltmst, suite 100 Meridian Idaho 83642-2600 X248) 811 Page Fac 87??(208) 887-x.291 I SANITARY SEWER LINE AND WATER MAIN EASEMENT THIS INDENTURE, made this day of , 20 , between Primeland Development Company, LLP, the party of the first part, and hereinafter called the Grantor, and the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party of the second part, and hereinafter called the Grantee; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Grantor desire to provide sanitary sewer line and water main rights-of-way across the premises and property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and WHEREAS, the sanitary sewer line and water main are to be provided through underground pipelines to be constructed by others; and WHEREAS, it will be necessary to maintain and service said pipelines from time to time by the Grantee; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to be received by the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the Grantor does hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the rights-of-way for an easement for the operation and maintenance of sanitary sewer line and water main over and across the following described property: The easement hereby granted is for the purpose of construction and operation of sanitary sewer lines and water main and their allied facilities, together with their maintenance, repair and replacement at the convenience of the Grantee, with the free right of access to such facilities at any and all times. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easement and rights-of-way unto the said Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. SEE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A, B, C, AND D. IT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that the Grantee, in making future repairs, will expediently replace and restore the premises to a condition comparable to that existent prior to undertaking such repairs and replacement. However, the Grantee will not be responsible for repairing, replacing or restoring any permanent structures, large trees, or brush placed within the area described in this easement. THE GRANTOR hereby covenants and agrees that he will not place or allow to be placed any permanent structures, large trees, or brush within the area described for this easement, which would interfere with the use of said easement, for the purposes stated herein. 060 1 /Sews Sanitary Sewer and Water Easement.doc THE GRANTOR does hereby covenant with the Grantee that he is lawfully seized and possessed of the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that he has a good and lawful right to convey said easement, and that he will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever. That said easement shall be discontinued and ordinary use shall revert back to the underlying owner, in the event that the described property is properly constructed and completed in accordance with Ada County Highway District Standard Specifications and accepted as a public street through recordation of a final plat. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto subscribed his signature the day and year first hereinabove written. -i Frank S. Varriale, Managing artner 1111 S. Orchard, Suite 115 Boise, Idaho 83705 ACKNOWLEOMENT: STATE OF IDAHO ) ss. County of A� ) On this. day of , 20 � ,before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Frank S. Varriale, Managing Partner ,known or identified to me to be the person who executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. a O eo 0� M� k EJP �? s+ � 0601 /Bews Sanitary Sewer and Pio ary Public for the State of Idaho siding at: Aa� / My Commission Expires: Allge' h 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN ACCEPTANCE: Robert D. Corrie, Mayor Attest By William G. Berg, City Clerk Date Approved by City Counci I 0601 /Bews Sanitary Sewer and Water Easement.doc EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION FOR (NATER EASEMENTS PROPOSED BRIDGETOWER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 February 15, 2001 Two easements for water line construction and maintenance, located in the South % of Section 35, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows: Water Easement No.1 Commencing at the southeast corner of the Southwest Y4 (South % corner) of Section 35, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian; thence N 00°26155" E 613.39 feet along the east line of said Southwest % to a point, thence N 00090'00" E 48.77 feet to the REAL POINT of BEGINNING of this easement description; Thence N 14035'53" E 37.54 feet to a point; Thence S 75024'07" E 22.50 feet to a point; Thence S 14035'53" W 37.54 feet to a point; Thence N 75°24'07" W 22.50 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this easement description, said easement covering 845 square feet, more or less. Water Easement No.2 Commencing at the southeast corner of the Southwest Y/ (South ,/ comer) of Section 35, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian; thence N 00026'55" E 765.45 feet along the east line of said Southwest '/ to a point, thence N 00000'00" W 88.83 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this easement description, Thence N 69052'20" W 25.00 feet to a point; Thence N 18037'23" E 21.00 feet to a point; Thence S 69'052'20" E 25.00 feet to a point; Thence S 18037'23" W 21.00 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this easement description, said easement covering 525 square feet, more or less. Michael E. Marks, PLS 4998 0601/060 l . watease. des. doc EXHIBIT B l DESCRIPTION FOR SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PROPOSED BRIDGETOWER SUBDIVISION NO. 1 November 10, 2000 An easement for sanitary sewer line construction and maintenance, located in the South Y2 of Section 35, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, being more particularly described as follows.- Commencing ollows: Commencing at the southeast corner of the Southwest '/4 (South % corner) of Section 35, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian; thence N 00026'55" E 255.75 feet along the east line of said Southwest % to a point on the northerly right-of-way of Fivemile Creek; thence N 62008'33" IJV 100.98 feet along said northerly right-of-way to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this easement description; Thence continuing along said northerly right-of-way N 62°08'33" W 15.00 feet to a point; Thence N 28000'00" E 308.30 feet to a point; Thence N 14035'53" E 48.57 feet to a point; Thence S 62000'00" E 26.26 feet to a point; Thence S 28000'00" W 355.51 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this easement description, said easement covering 5,600 square feet, more or less. Michael E. Marks, PLS 4998 Z7 0601/060 1. ssease. des. doe TEMPORARY EXHIBIT °C"( / �' '' WATER ASEAIENT No.2 / GO SED /0 WR o�SU N. �C TEMPORARY WATER EASEMENT No.1 N,o r C yT rF0 / �RASFS OF / �RFF� tion' D r � � O PROPOSED �Zx, PRIMELAND SUBDIVISION I I I N 18 19 — — — 13 24 � W. USTICK ROAD— S 1/4 CORNER SECTION 35 SECTION CORNER F/7� POINT OF COMENCING Found Bross Cap/ // WATER EASEMENT C.P.&F. No. 9018195 BRIGGSENGINEERING, INC. TEMPORARY WATER EASEMENTS REVISION PROPOSED BRIDGETOWER SUBDIVISION No.l f3f? I G G S LOCATED IN THE S 1/2 OF SECTION 35, T.4N., R.1 W., B.M. SHEET ADA COUNTY, IDAHO (20e)344-9700 1 OF 1 1800 w. OVERLAND ROAD DESIGN DRAFT SCALE DATE DWG.NO. BOISE, IDAHO 83705 DPM 1 " = 100 02/15/01 0601 0601—WATEASE.DWG J-" j6L j-Lj-).L .L L s s�o � 26 *1 , D00 - �4 e � ,moo PROPOSED SEWER LINE P OPOSED BRID ETOWER NO. 1 c 0o .00 'aoo N. l:-) . SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT 5500 SF +�- I REAL POINT GF BEGINNING oon ";�. 9� 111/k � T Ln U OF Lo nt o�o � 1 � W. USTICK ROAD SOUTH 1/4 CORNER SECTION 35 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT REVISION BRIDGETOWER SUBDIVISION N0. 1 BRIGGS LOCATED IN THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 35 SHEET TAN., R.1 W., B.M., MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 1 OF 1 (208)344-9700 1800 W. OVERLAND ROAD DESIGN DRAFT SCALE DATE DWG.NO. BOISE, IDAHO 83705 , . _ , . _ ,_ _ _ _ _ _ bKB 1 = 100 1 1 / 10/00 0501 0501--SSEASE.DWG r �r March 16, 2001 Department Report MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 20, 2001 APPLICANT Gary Smith ITEM NO. 4-B-7 REQUEST Digester and Clarifier Facilities Project Agreement for Completion AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT.- CITY EPT:CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION.- IDAHO RRIGATION:IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: Date: COMMENTS See atFached Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Merldian. City of Meri pan EPublic Works Dept.RECEIVED MAR 16 2001 e rn o To: Mayor and Council From: Brad Watson, P. E. Z/(� CC: File, Cary Smith, PE, City Clerk's Office Date: 03/16/01 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 20 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the March 20 City Council agenda, under Department Reports, for Council's consideration: I Well No. 22 Test Well Drilling. This agreement with Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. is for drilling a test well near the future production well in the Bear Creek Park. Stevens and Sons has completed at least six test wells for the City during the last five years. Information from the test well will be used to design the production well that will be drilled later this spring. The agreement will be on a time and materials basis not to exceed $24,900. Recommended council Action: Award the contract for drilling the Bear creek test well to Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. for a time and material amount notes -exceed of $24,904 and authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the contract 2) Well No. 22 Pum in Facilities Lkgreement For Professional Services. This agreement with Civil Survey Consultants is to provide design and construction services for Well No. 22 in the Bear Creek Park. The design fee is $16,020.00 and the construction services fee is $6,830.00, both on a time and materials/not-to- exceed aternals/not to - exceed basis. Civil Survey Consultants has provided these services on at least four similar projects in the last fire years. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. 0 Page 1 Recommended Council Action: Award the contract for Well Facilities Professional Services Agreement to Civil Survey consultants in the arnount of $'16,020.00 for design and $6,530.00 for construction services and BradWatson, P.E. city hnpmux Meridian Public works Deparftnent 200 E. Carlton St, Suite 100 Merilb % Idaho 83642-2600 No. 22 Pumping From the desk of .. (208)887-2211 Fax (208) 887-1297 watsonb[ ci.mai&mid.us authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the agreement 3) Contract„ Award for ,WWTP Standby-GeneratorProcurement. The Public Works Department, with the assistance of Taylor Engineers, rsolicited bids for a 400 KW standby generator for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Two bids were received and are as follows: EC Power Systems $51,613.34 Cummins Intermountain $54,407.85 The bid prices are near estimates and within budget. The generator will be installed as part of a larger electrical upgrade project later this spring that is currently under design by Taylor Engineers. Recommended Council Action: Award of the procurement contract to EC Power Systems for the WWrP Standby Generator in the amount of $5'1,5'13.34 and authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the contract 4) Di ester & Clarifier Facilities Project A reement For Com lotion. This agreement defines the terms of closing out the project with Tum -Key, Inc. Specifically, it defines the status of change Orders #4 - ##6, a revised deadline by which all remaining work must be completed, and redefines liquidated damages if the work is not completed by that deadline. I have reviewed the agreement with Bill Nichols and I believe he is satisfied with it. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. Recommended council Action: authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest Agreement for completion with Turn -Key, Inc. far the Digester & Clarifier Facilities project Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 CITY OF MERIDIAN DIGESTER AND CLARHUR FACILITIES AGREEMENT FOR COMPLETION. February 211 .2001 BACKGROUND } The City of Meridian, Feller Associates, Inc., and Turn -Key, Inc. have differences of opine on on several issues as have arisen over the course of this project. As a matter of negotiation to resolve remaining issues and to complete all work in a timely manner, the parties agree to the following terms for resolving the remaining issues associated with completion of the project. The parties agree that this agreement supercedes any and all previous provisions in the Contract Documents regarding completion dates and liquidated damages. ChangeOrders/Time Extension Change Order No. 4 (costs previously approved by Council) and Change Order No. 5 (to go to Council for approval the first meeting in February) reflect all remaining monetary costs for Turn -Key completion of the work. Turn -Key may request payment for Change Order No. 4 costs now and Change Order No. 5 costs upon Council approval. Change Order No, 6 defines a time extension provided for Turn Key to substantially complete the project within the Contract period and the Notice of Substantial Completion. Therefore, Turn -Key will incur no liquidated damages to date and may request release of liquidated damages currently withheld by the City after approval of Change Order No. 6. - In return, the City shall not be charged any extended overhead costs for any time extensions allowed to date (including Change Order Nos. 5 & 6 time extensions). Completion of RemaM work Turn -Key will proceed with remaining punchlist items and uncompleted work not affected by weather on or before February 12, 2001 and shall complete that worm by March 31, 2001. Exterior work (paving, gravel, grading, etc.) impacted by weather shall commence as soon as weather conditions allow and the ground sufficiently dries out upon a Notice to Proceed with Exterior worm, issued by the City and shall be completed within 30' days of that restart. Liouidated .Dama,�es Turn --Key agrees that if the above work is not completed within the time frames -indicated above in "Completion of Remam* m' g work", Turn --Key will pay the City $500 per day for each day exceeding the above_ allowances. This stipulation includes $500 for each day after March 31, 2001 that, the interior work is not completed and $500 for each day beyond 30 days that the exterior work is not completed. 197040/1101-026 i. City of Meridian Digester and Clarifier Fac iiit es Agreem' ent for Coletion February 2, 2001 Page 2 of 2 All parties indicate their agreement to the above by signing below, Keller Associates, Inc.: Date: City of Meridian: 197040/1/01-026 Date: ..I a -. _ Bate: March 16, 2001 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Gary Smith March 20, 2001 Department Report ITEM NO. 4-B-6 REQUEST Contract Award for WWTP Standby Generator Procurement AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: Date: COMMENTS See attached - Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of !Meridian. I rill_, 1 -1 - To: Mayor and Council From: Brad Watson, P. E. CC: File, Cary Smith, PE, City Clerk's Office Date: 03/18101 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 20 City Council Meeting RECEIVED MAR 16 2001 OITY OF MERIDIAN The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the March 20 City Council agenda, under Department Reports, for Council's consideration: I ] Well No. 22 Test Well Drilling. This agreement with Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. is for drilling a test well near the future production well in the Bear Creek Park. Stevens and Sons has completed at least six test wells for the City during the last five years. Information from the test well will be used to design the production well that will be drilled later this spring. The agreement will be on a time and materials basis not to exceed $24,900. . Recommended Council Action; Award the contract for drilling the Bear creek gest well to Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. for a time and material amount not -to -exceed of $24,900 and authorize Mayor to sign and city Clerk to attest the contract 2) Well No. 22 Pumping Facilities 6greement For Professional Services. This agreement with Civil Survey Consultants is to provide design and construction services for Well No. 22 in the Bear Creek Park. Ther design fee is $16,020.00 and the construction services fee is $6,830.00, both on a time and materials/not-to- exceed basis. Civil Survey Consultants has provided these services on at least four similar projects in the last five years. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. 0 Page 1 Recommended council Action: Award the contract for Well Facilities Professional Services Agreement to Civil Survey consultants in the amount of $16,020.00 for design and $6,830.00 for construction services and sra Watwn, P.E. City Engmecr Mean Public Works Dqxxftnent 204 E. Carton St, Suite 104 Meridian, Idaho 83642-2600 No. 22 Pumping From the desk of.. (208) 857-2211 Fax (208) 887-1297 vaisonb&i.meridian id.us an � City of Mere Public Works Dept. I rill_, 1 -1 - To: Mayor and Council From: Brad Watson, P. E. CC: File, Cary Smith, PE, City Clerk's Office Date: 03/18101 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 20 City Council Meeting RECEIVED MAR 16 2001 OITY OF MERIDIAN The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the March 20 City Council agenda, under Department Reports, for Council's consideration: I ] Well No. 22 Test Well Drilling. This agreement with Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. is for drilling a test well near the future production well in the Bear Creek Park. Stevens and Sons has completed at least six test wells for the City during the last five years. Information from the test well will be used to design the production well that will be drilled later this spring. The agreement will be on a time and materials basis not to exceed $24,900. . Recommended Council Action; Award the contract for drilling the Bear creek gest well to Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. for a time and material amount not -to -exceed of $24,900 and authorize Mayor to sign and city Clerk to attest the contract 2) Well No. 22 Pumping Facilities 6greement For Professional Services. This agreement with Civil Survey Consultants is to provide design and construction services for Well No. 22 in the Bear Creek Park. Ther design fee is $16,020.00 and the construction services fee is $6,830.00, both on a time and materials/not-to- exceed basis. Civil Survey Consultants has provided these services on at least four similar projects in the last five years. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. 0 Page 1 Recommended council Action: Award the contract for Well Facilities Professional Services Agreement to Civil Survey consultants in the amount of $16,020.00 for design and $6,830.00 for construction services and sra Watwn, P.E. City Engmecr Mean Public Works Dqxxftnent 204 E. Carton St, Suite 104 Meridian, Idaho 83642-2600 No. 22 Pumping From the desk of.. (208) 857-2211 Fax (208) 887-1297 vaisonb&i.meridian id.us { authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the agreement 3) Contract Award for WWTP Standby Generator Procurement. The Public Works Department, with the assistance of Taylor Engineers, solicited bids for a 400 KW standby generator for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Two bids were received and are as follows: EC Power Systems $51,613.34 Cummins Intermountain $54,407.85 The bid prices are near estimates and within budget. The generator will be installed as part of a larger electrical upgrade project later this sprang that is currently under design by Taylor Engineers. Recommended Council Action: Award of the procurement contract to EC Power Systems for the WVV"TP Standby Generator in the amount of $51,613.34 and authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the contract 4) Digester & Clarifier Facilities Project 6greement For Com letion. This agreement defines the terms of closing out the project with Tum -Key, Inc. Specifically, it defines the status of Change Orders #4 - #6, a revised deadline by which all remaining work must be completed, and redefines liquidated damages if the work is not completed by that deadline. I have reviewed the agreement with Bill Nichols and I believe he is satisfied with it. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. Recommended Council Action: authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest Agreement for Completion with Turn -Key, Inc. for the Digester & Clarifier Facilities project Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. F r PO A ;00 Mal/'d 0 Page 2 March 16, 2001 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 20, 2001 Department Report APPLICANT Gary Smith ITEM NO. 4-8-5 REQUEST Well No. 22 Pumping Facilities Agreement for Professional Services AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: COMMENTS See attached 6fe 4\ -al Date: Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall became property of the City of Meridian. City of Meri pan Public Works .Dept.RECEIVEIE MAR 16 2001 rtl e nn o To: Mayor and Council From: Brad Watson, P.E. CC% File, Gary Smith, PE, City clerk's Office Date: 03/16/01 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 20 city Council Meefing The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the March 20 city council agenda, under Department Reports, for council's consideration: 1 Well No. 22 Test Well Drilling. This agreement with Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. is for drilling a test well near the future production well in the Bear Creek Park. Stevens and Sons has completed at least six test wells for the city during the last five years. Information from the test well will be used to design the production well that will be drilled later this spring. The agreement will be on a time and materials basis not to exceed $24,900. Recommended Council Action: Award the contract for drilling the Bear creek test well to Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. for a time and material amount not -to -exceed of $24,940 and authorize Mayor to sign and city Clerk to attest the contract 2) Well No. 22 Pumping,Facilities 6greement For Professional Services. This agreement with Civil Survey consultants is to provide design and construction Services for Well No. 22 in the Bear creek Park. The design fee is $16,020.00 and the construcfion services fee is $6,830.00, both on a time and materials/not-to- exceed basis. civil Survey Consultants has provided these services on at least four similar projects in the last five years. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. 0 Page 1 Recommended Council Action: Award the contract for Well Facilities Professional Services Agreement to Civil Surrey consultants in the amount of $16,020.00 for design and $8,830.00 for construction services and sna WJ1tWn, P.& Assistant City Eremmr Mwi mn Public Works Deparfinent 200 E. Carlton St, Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642-2600 No, 22 Pumping Fmm the desk of .. (208)887-2211 Fax (208) 887-1297 watmb@ci.meridianJd.us authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the agreement 3) Contract Award for WWTP Standby -Generator Procurement. The Public Works Department, with the assistance of Taylor Engineers, solicited bids for a 400 KW standby generator for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Two bids were received and are as follows: EC Power Systems $51,613.34 Cummins Intermountain $54,407.85 The bid prices are near estimates and within budget. The generator will be installed as part of a larger electrical upgrade project later this spring that is currently under design by Taylor Engineers. Recommended Council Action: Award of the procurement contract to EC Power Systems for the wWTP Standby Generator in the amount of $51,5'13.34 and authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the contract 4) Digester & . Clarifier Facilities Project Agreement For Complefion. This agreement defines the terns of closing out the project with Tum -Key, Inc. Specifically, it defines the status of Change orders #4 - #0, a revised deadline by which all remaining work must be completed, and redefines liquidated damages if the work is not completed by that deadline. I have reviewed the agreement with Bill Nichols and I believe he is satisfied with it. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. Recommended Council Action: authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest Agreement for completion with Turn -Key, Inc. for the [digester & Clarifier Facilities project Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items. 0 Page 2 *2 �i i CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS, INS.'. AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Project No. 01022 THIS AGREEMENT between THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, hereinafter referred to as the "CLIENT" and CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS, INC., an Idaho Corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CSC" is made and entered into this day of , 2001. The CLIENT and CSC in consideration of their mutual covenants herein agree as set forth below. The Client intends to construct new pumping facilities at well No. 22 located in the future City park to be constructed as part of Bear Run Subdivision on Stoddard Road between Overland Road and Victory Road. The proposed improvements consist of a new pump house, vertical turbine well pump and motor, electrical controls, emergency generator, site improvements and appurtenances, hereinafter referred to as the PROJECT. CLIENT INFORMATION AND RESPONSIBILITIES The CLIENT will provide to CSC a -full and complete description of the PROJECT including; all design criteria, information as to CLIENT's requirements for the PROJECT, design objectives and constraints, capacity and performance requirements, flexibility and expandability needs, any budgetary limitations, and copies of all design and construction standards which CLIENT will require to be incorporated in the Drawings and Specifications. The CLIENT will also provide to CSC all associated project information including data prepared by others; soil borings, probings and subsurface explorations; hydrographic surveys; laboratory tests and inspection reports of samples, materials and equipment; studies and interpretations of all environmental assessment and impact statements; surveys of record; property descriptions; zoning, deed and other land use restrictions; title reports; other special data or consultations as may be available; all of which CSC may use and rely upon in performing services under this Agreement. The CLIENT will obtain permission for CSC to enter upon public and private property as required for CSC to perform services under this Agreement. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY CSC CSC will provide services as outlined in the attached letter dated March 13, 2001. BASIS OF FEE AND BILLING SCHEDULE The Client will pay CSC for services provided under this Agreement per the attached letter dated March 13, 2001. Notice to Proceed, either verbal or written, shall constitute acceptance of this Agreement by the CLIENT. THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ARE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT. THE CLIENT AGREES TO SAID TERMS AND CONDITIONS. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 BY: TITLE: Civil Survey Consultants, Inc. 100 South Adkins way, Suite 101 Meridian, Idaho 83542 WO 1 of 4 3113101 i CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS, INC. TERMS AND CONDITIONS GENERAL - GSC shall provide for CLIENT professional engineering and/or land surveying services for the Project described in this Agreement. These services will be performed in accordance with generally accepted professional practices for the intended use of the project. CSC makes no other warranty either expressed or implied. CSC shall not be responsible for acts or omissions of any party involved in the Project other than their own. CSC shall not be responsible for failure of any contractor or subcontractor to construct any item in accordance with recommendations issued by CSC. CSC has not been retained to supervise, direct or have control over Contractor's work. CSC specifically does not have authority over or responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction selected by Contractors), for safety precautions and programs incident to the work of Contractor(s) or for any failure of Contractor(s) to comply with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes or orders applicable to Contractor(s) furnishing and performing their work. Accordingly, CSC can neither guarantee the performance of the construction contracts by Contractor(s) nor assume responsibility for Contractor(s) failure to furnish and perform their work in accordance with the Contract Documents. The CLIENT understands and agrees that subsurface and soils characteristics may vary greatly between successive test points and sample intervals. CSC will doordinate this work in accordance with generally accepted practice of the professional services being provided and makes no other warranties expressed or implied or as to the professional advice furnished by professionals providing soils testing or geotechnical advice. Resetting of survey and/or construction stakes shall constitute extra work and shall be paid for on a time and material basis in addition to any other payment provided in this Agreement. OPINIONS OF COST - CSC may be asked to provide opinions of construction or PROJECT costs as part of the professional services under this Agreement. The CLIENT understands and agrees that CSC has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the Contractors)' methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions. The CLIENT understands that CSC opinions of cost are based on CSC experience and represents CSC's judgment based on that experience, but CSC does not guarantee or warranty that either quotes, bids or estimates prepared by contractors, subcontractors or other will not deviate from opinions prepared by CSC. The CLIENT agrees to employ an independent cost estimator if the CLIENT desires additional assurance, warranty or guarantee of PROJECT costs. Should the CLIENT request that CSC modify any PROTECT aspect to reduce construction costs, then those services shall be considered additional and beyond the scope of this Agreement unless specifically stated otherwise in this Agreement. REUSE OF DOCUMENTS - CSC shall retain an ownership interest of all professional products prepared by CSC. The CLIENT agrees that no product will be reused without specific written permission of CSC. The CLIENT agrees to indemnify and hold CSC harmless from any claims, damages, losses and expenses arising from unauthorized reuse of all work products prepared by CSC for the PROJECT. GOVERNING LAVA - Unless otherwise provided in an addendum, the law of the State of Idaho will govern the validity of this Agreement, its interpretation and performance, and remedies for contract breach or any other claims related to this Agreement. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS - CLIENT and CSC each is hereby bound and the partners, successors, executors, administrators and legal representatives of CLIENT and CSC are likewise bound to the other party to this Agreement, in respect of all covenants, agreements and obligations of this Agreement. Nothing under this Agreement shall be construed to give any rights or benefits in this Agreement to anyone other than CLIENT and CSC, and all duties and responsibilities undertaken pursuant to this Agreement will be for the sole and exclusive benefit of CLIENT and CSC and not for the benefit of any other party. wo 2 of 4 3113101 TIMES OF PAYMENTS - CSC smut/ submit monthly statements for services refiu..i- ed and for Reimbursable Expenses incurred. CLIENT shall make prompt monthly payments. If CLIENT fails to make any payment due CSC for services and expenses within thirty (3 0) days after receipt of CSC's statement therefor, the amounts due CSC will be increased at the rate of 1.5% per month from said tenth day, and in addition, CSC may, after giving ten days' written notice to CLIENT, suspend services under this Agreement until CSC has been paid in full all amounts due for services, expenses and charges. TERMINATION - The obligation to provide further services under this Agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty days' written notice. Such termination shall be based upon substantial lack of performance by the other party under the terms and conditions of this Agreement when said substantial lack of performance is through no fault of the terminating parry. If this Agreement is terminated by either party, CSC shall be paid for services rendered and for reimbursable expenses incurred to the date of such termination. HAZARDOUS WASTE AND ASBESTOS - The CLIENT and CSC agree that the work covered in this Agreement does not anticipate either the presence or remediation of hazardous waste and/or asbestos. Hazardous materials may exist where there is not reason to believe they should be present. CSC and the CLIENT agree that the discovery of unanticipated hazardous materials constitutes a changed condition mandating a renegotiation of the scope of work or termination of services. CSC and the CLIENT also agree that the discovery of unanticipated hazardous materials may make it necessary for CSC to take immediate measures to protect human health and safety, and/or the environment. CSC agrees to notify the CLIENT as soon as practically possible should unanticipated hazardous materials or suspected hazardous materials be encountered. The CLIENT encourages CSC to take any and all measures that in CSC's professional opinion are justified to preserve and protect the health and safety of CSC's personnel and the public, and/or the environment, and the CLIENT agrees to compensate CSC for the additional cost of such work. In addition, the CLIENT waives any claim against CSC, and agrees to indemnify, defend and hold CSC harmless from any claim or liability for injury or loss arising from CSC's encountering unanticipated hazardous materials or suspected hazardous materials. The CLIENT also agrees to compensate CSC for any time spent and expenses incurred by CSC in defense of any such claim, with such compensation to be based upon CSC's prevailing fee schedule and expense reimbursement policy. DISPUTE RESOLUTION - All claims, disputes or controversies arising out of, or in relation to the interpretation, application or enforcement of this Agreement shall be decided through non-binding mediation or other mutually agreed alternative dispute resolution technique. The CLIENT and CSC agree non-binding mediation or other mutually acceptable alternative dispute resolution technique shall precede litigation or recourse to other judicial forums. RECOVERY OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION COSTS - In the event that legal action is brought by either party against the other, the prevailing party shall be reimbursed by the other for the prevailing party's legal costs, in addition to whatever other judgments or settlement sums, if any, may be due. Such legal costs shall include, but not be limited to, reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, expert witness fees and other documented expenses, as well as the value of time spent by the prevailing party and those in his or her employ in researching the issues in questions, discussing matters with attorneys and others, preparing for depositions, responding to interrogatories, and so on. The value of time spent and the expenses incurred shall, on CSC's part, be computed based upon CSC's prevailing fee schedule and expense reimbursement policy relative to the recovery of direct project costs. EXTENT OF AGREEMENT - This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the CLIENT and CSC and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, written or oral. The Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both CLIENT and CSC. wO 3 of 4 3113101 Genn K. Bennett, P.L.S. Civil Survey Consultants,, Inc. President 100 South Adkins Way Timothy � A. Burgess, P.E. Suite 101 Vice President Meridian, Idaho 83642 Labor: CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS PREVAILING FEE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVVE OCTOBER 1, 2000 Project Manager - $ 80.00 per hour Chief of Surveys - $ 80.00 per hour Project Engineer - $ 65.00 per hour Design Engineer - $ 60.00 per hour Design/Survey Technician 1 - $55.00 per hour Design/Survey Technician 2 - $ 50.00 per hour 2 -Man Survey Crew - $ 95.00 per hour 3 -Man Survey Crew - $150.00 per hour Direct Expenses: GPS - $ 40.00 per hour Vehicle 2 -Wheel Drive - $ No Charge Vehicle 4 -Wheel Drive - $ No Charge Outside Printing - $Cost Long Distance Telephone - $Cost Sub -Consultants - $Cost (208)888-4312 Fax 858-0323 Wo 4 of 4 3/13101 Glenn K. Sennett, P.L.S. President Timothy A. Burgess, P.E. Vice President. Brad Watson, P.E. Assistant City Engineer City of Meridian 200 East Carlton, Suite 100 Meridian, IIS 83642--2600 Re: Well No. 22 Bear Brad: �,ivil Survey Consultants_, Inc. 100 South Adkins Way Suite 101 Meridian, Idaho 83 642 (208)888-4312 Fax 888-0323 March 13, 2001 Thank you for considering Civil Survey Consultants to provide professional services required for the construction of neve pumping facilities for Well No. 22. We propose to provide these services based upon the following scope of services: Design Services: 1. The new well has been not been constructed as of this date. It is the City's intent to proceed with development of pumping facility construction plans prior to actual completion of the well. For design purposes, we are assuming a flow rate of 4.5 cfs (2000 gpm), which will require a 150 horsepower motor under the assumed design head conditions. The well configuration will be similar to the other recently completed wells with the addition of a permanent auxiliary generator. Actual delivery rate will be determined once the well is completed. 2. CSC will provide complete design services required for preparation of plans and specifications for new pumping facilities. The site is located on City owned property on the east site of Stoddard approximately midway between overland Road and Victory Road. The well will be located in a future city park. The new pumping facilities will include the following components: a. The well building will be masonry block construction, with aluminum fascia and soffets, and architectural fiberglass shingles. There will not be a separate chlorine room. The building will be sized to house the emergency generator in an area separate from the pumping equipment. The generator area will be covered, and vandal resistant but will be open to the atmosphere to eliminate the need for special ventilation. Watson March 13, 2001 Page 2 of S b. The configuration of the well building and access drive has been established and approved by the Meridian parks department. The Consultant shall use this approved site plan for final design. C. The Consultant will prepare conceptual plans for the proposed well building based upon the previous plans prepared for well No. 21 with the addition of the new auxiliary generator. The conceptual plans will be presented to the Meridian parks department and public works department for selection of a preferred concept. The Consultant will proceed with final design upon receipt of written approval of the preferred concept. d. The well will be equipped with a new water lubricated vertical turbine pump. The final pump will be selected based upon the characteristics of the actual completed well. A design flow rate of 2000 gpm and 150 horsepower motor size will be used for design purposes. The well is anticipated to be non -flowing at this site. An automatic pre -lube system will be provided for the pump column bearings. If the actual constructed well is a flowing artesian well a supplemental agreement will be prepared to modify the design. d. The pump motor will be controlled by a Variable Frequency Drive (VFD). e. The auxiliary generator will be provided with an above ground fuel tank and complete automatic transfer switch. f. The contract will require that the Contractor install a Radio Telemetry (RTU) Panel to operate the well with the current City system. The RTU panel will be furnished by the City. The contract will require the Contractor to install a conduit to support the antenna. The City will install the actual antenna and wiring. The Contract will require the Contractor to install conduit between the RTU and VFD, along with the necessary contacts and wiring for the desired telemetry functions. The City will provide a list of fuazctions to be included, and the type of contact(s) required. g. The building will include heating, ventilation and air conditioning. Intake louvers will be required for the generator radiator. h. A liquid solution -metering pump will be provided. The pump will be controlled by connection to a wall receptacle that is only energized when the well pump is running. Watson March 13, 2001 Page 3 of 5 i. Site improvements will consist of a paved access roadway as per the approved site plan. Pavement will be hot plant mix asphalt. j J. No landscaping will be provided under this contract. All landscaping will be provided by the Meridian parks department. k. The well will be provided with a by-pass that discharges to an existing unnamed drain ditch crossing the city park site. The preferred location for the by --pass discharge is the piped portion of the drain located just west of the pump house. The Consultant shall confirm the capacity of this pipe. If capacity is available the Consultant will design a by-pass to this location and submit the plan to the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for approval. If the pipe is too small to accommodate the by-pass flow, the Consultant shall design a by-pass which runs north approximately 300 feet to the point where the drain becomes an open ditch on the west side of Stoddard. This plan will also be submitted to Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for approval. 4. CSC will submit the completed plans and specifications to the Idaho Department of Health and welfare, Division of Environmental Quality, and the owner for review and approval. 5. CSC will provide an advertisement for bids for publication by the owner; answer any pre-bid questions; attend the bid opening. CSC will provide the owner 20 copies of plans and specifications for bidding purposes. 6. CSC will attend a pre -construction meeting. 7. The owner will provide the following: a. Furnish CSC predicted distribution system pressure at the point of connection to the distribution system at 500, 1000, 1500, 2000, and 2500 gpm well discharge rates. b. Furnish CSC a dimensional drawing of the completed well; pump test data, and well draw down for use in final pump selection. C. Furnish electronic files in AutoCAD Release 14 format of the construction plans for- the park and Bear Run Subdivision within the limits of the well site and by- pass pipeline.. Watson March 13, 2001 Page 4 of 5 d. Obtain all necessary agreements with the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District for the discharge to the drain ditch. e. Arrange for power service to be extended to the site by Idaho Power. f. Perform all work required to construct the new well, including obtaining site approval from DEQ, designing the well, bidding and construction services. g. Issue the Notice Of Award, Agreement, and Notice To Proceed, and will handle all contract administrative work. Construction Services: 1. CSG will provide complete construction services including coordination between the Owner, Contractor, Sub -contractors and Sub -consultants. 2. CSC will provide construction observation services. 3. CSC will prepare contractor's partial payment estimates for approval by the owner. 4. GSC will review and evaluate the need for change orders during construction and provide a recommendation to the owner regarding their approval or denial. 5. CSC will conduct the final inspection and assist the owner with project close out. 6. CSC will prepare record drawings for the completed facilities. 7. CSC will conduct a one year warranty inspection. Civil Survey Consultants proposes to provide the Design Services as outlined above on a time and materials basis with a not to exceed amount of $ 16,020.00 without prior approval of the Owner. Civil Survey Consultants proposes to provide the Construction Services as outlined above on a time and materials basis according to the attached rate schedule plus direct expenses and sub -consultant expenses. The estimated fee for construction services is approximately $ 6, 83 0.00. The above fee estimates are based upon utilizing Mulder Engineering Incorporated for the electrical engineering services and Kartchner Engineering for mechanical services. Copies of their proposal letters are enclosed for your reference. A man-hour and fee estimates for CSC's services is also enclosed for your reference. The above fee estimates assume the City will pay all costs associated with permits, licenses, testing, and publishing costs. Watson March 13, 2001 Page 5 of 5 If the proposed scope of services and fee estimates are acceptable please sign and return one copy of the enclosed Agreement for Professional Services. Again, thank you for considering Civil Survey Consultants for this project. Sincerely, Tim Burgess, P.E. Vice President enc. Civil Survey Consultants Design Fee Estimate City of Meridian Municipal Well No. 22 Classifiaction Hours Rate Total Project Manager 28.00 @ $80.00 -- $2,240.00 Project Engineer 140.00 a@ $05.00 w $9,100.00 Professional Land Surveyor 2.00 @3a $80.00 = $100.00 Survey Techncian 12.00 @a $55.00 = $650.00 GPS 4.00 a@ $40.00 = $100.00 Labor Subtotal 1 182.00 1$121320 Classifiaction Hrs/Miles Rate Total Plan Set Printing 30 @ $4.00 = $120.00 S ecification Printing 30 @ $15.00 = $450.00 Misc. Printing_$50.00 Kartchner -HVAC $1,200.00 Mulder -Electrical $2,450.00 Direct Subtotal $37700.00 Total Design Fees $16,020.00 We1122.xis 3/13/01 Civil Survey Consultants Construction Services Fee Estimate City of Meridian Municipal Well No. 22 Classifiaction Hours Misc. Printing Rate Total Project Manager 9.00 @ $80.00 = $720.00 Project En ineer 66.00 @ $60.00 = $39960.00 Professional Land Surveyor 4.00 @ $80.00 = $320.00 Survey Techncian 8.00 @ $55.00 = $440.00 GPS 8.00 @ $40.00 = $320.00 Labor Subtotal I 87.00 $5,760.00 Classifiaction Hrs/Miles Rate Total Misc. Printing $20.00 Kartchner -HVAC 6.00 @ $70.00 $420.00 Mulder -Electrical 9.00 @ $70.00 $630.00 Direct Subtotal $1,070.00 Total Construction Fees $6,830.00 We1122.xls 3/13101 Civil Survey Consultants Man-hour Estimate City of Meridian Municipal Well No. 22 We1122.xis 3113101 Task Description Professional Engineer Design En ineer PLS Technician Tota 1. Design a. Coordination & Meetings_____ 8 8 16 b. Site Surveys 0 1 4 5 c. Building Co nce is and Approval 4 24 28 d. Hydraulic Anal sis 1 8 9 e. Pump & Piping 1 8 9 f. Building 4 24 28 g. Site DesiEn 1 4 5 h. Bypass Piping 1 16 1 8 26 1. Access Road 1 4 5 h. Contract Documents 2 24 26 i. Review and A roval 4 16 20 2. Bidding a. Coordination & Meetings 1 4 5 Design & Bidding Total Man -Hours 28 140 2 12 182 3. Construction a. Coordination & Meetings 2 4 6 b. Construction Staking 4 8 12 b. Inspection 4 40 44 c. Payment Estimates 1 6 7 d. Change orders 1 6 7 e. Record Drawings 1 10 11 Construction Total Man -Hours 9 66 4 8 87 We1122.xis 3113101 Transmitted Via Fax. 858-0323 March S, 2001 Civil Survey Consultants, Inc. Timothy Burgess, PE 100 South Atkins Way Meridian, ID 53642 Re: Meridian Well Pu mphouse #22 Dear Tim, KARTCHNER ENGINEERING I am proposing a mechanical engineering fee not to exceed $1,200.00 (One Thousand Two Hundred Dollars) for the design and preparation of HVAC drawings for the referenced project. The above figure includes design for full coaling and ventilation similar to Well #21; design and/or input for addressing emergency generator ventilation outside of pumphouse environment, heating/cooling load calculafiens; preparation of HVAC drawings reflecting design considerations noted above and meeting all necessary code requirements, specifications, review of submittals and answering contractors questions during the bidding process. This fee is based on being provided with electronic files of floor plans and elevations. Any as -built drawing preparation or construction observation will be billed as extra services. Labor for extra services will be based on 3.0 times the employees' hourly salary, my time at $70.00 per hour. Unless otherwise stated, this agreement shall be in accordance with the latest edition of the AIA Architect and Engineers Agreement form. An invoice for the above work will be sent at completion of work and is due upon receipt. Thank you for the opportunity to work with you again. Sincerely, WO 5- Kartchner engineering Rah r�re11 k 16W W"t Barren Drive Mechanical Engineers ■ Meridian, lD 83$42 (2W) 888-7145 + Fax (248) 888-7165 ' ron .net TOO/TOO [a DMIHHNIDNH UMMMU 59TL88980Z XVa Lz = 8o nHZ TO0Z/8OIV0 Mulder Engineering r\\[F=Incorporated 4094 Chinden Boulevard, Ste. 200 Boise, Idaho 83714 Phone (208) 336-0245 Fax (206) 345-1774 March 9, 2001 Proposal submitted to: civil, surrey consultants, P.O. Box 39 1530 W. state St. Meridian ID 83680 Attention: 'dim Burgess PR o PD SAL /,SCC E P TRIC E (HOURLY CONTRACT) Inc. For Project: New Meridian Well Pump Facility,, sante as Well #21 except with EM Generator We hereby propose to perform the following services for the referenced project: Lump Sum services include : Electra.cal design, preparation of construction documents, construction administration and bid .9ervices will be done on an hourly basis as requested. With payment to be made on the following terms: Hourly Rates: $80.00 Princitpal $70.00 - Design Engineer $40. o0 - CAD $35.00 - Clerical Hourly Not to .Exceed $2,450.00 Respectfully submitted. P Y If acceptable, please return one signed copy to our o { fice . �l�ase note, w� will neither begin work nor commit to a project schedule without a signed: agreement or AIA contract. .,_.,... .-. ......r�rrrrrr�rr.-----------... OWN- . r---....----- ------.......++a4w�r........ Accept ance of Propos al The above proposal r including scope of work and terms of patent r are satisfactory and hereby accepted* You are autho zi z cd to do the work as specified. Accepted. Date : Signature- w_ E -Mail: muider9micron.net M'ULDER ENGINEERING'S HOURLY SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR PROJECT: New Meridian Well Pump Facility, same as Well #21 except with EM Generator DATE : March 9, 2001 The work to be performed by our office '.s as followse. C1 A. Construction Documents: Includes cleotrical design of the following systems: E�1 1* Interior, exterior and site lighting and controls cf the project. Q 2* Emergency and Exit lighting as required by codes, 3. Interior and exteario z pawe r distribution. 4. Fire Alarm Systems . L 5. Communications systems (voice and data) will ,include empty conduits outlet boxcsr and/or cable trays and under floor duct systems. E 6. Other Special systems will be done as described in Item 5 unless specifically noted he orcin . 7. Mechanical System Controls. B. Bid Services: Includes preparation of addendum and review of equipment submittals for prior approval. C C. Construction Services : Includes reviewing shop drawings, answering quest1ons and assisting in solving problems which may arise during constructi.on. We will make site visits during the course of Construction upon request. We request the Architect keep us apprised of construction progress so we can properly schedule visits.,Typical site visits occur prior to slab being poured or walls being sheet rocked. D. Billing 1?ract:.ccs: We will bill monthly at the attached rates for hours expended up to and including the last day of the month. Please initial below and return with fee agreement or contract. ARCHITECT CONSULTANT �/// March 16, 2001 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPLICANT Gary Smith REQUEST Well No. 22 Test Well Drilling AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: CITY SEWER DEPT.- MERIDIAN EPT:MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: SANITARY SERVICE COMPANY CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: Contacted: March 20, 2001 COMMENTS See attached Date: Department Report ITEM NO. 4-B--4 Phone: Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 115, blic Works 91:4 0 RECEIVEIE. MAR 16 2001 e rn o To: Mayor and Council From: Brad Watson, P.E. CC: File, Cary Smith, PE, City Clerk's Office Date: 03/16/01 Re: Proposed Agenda Items for March 20 City Council Meeting The Public Works Department respectfully requests the following items be placed on the !March 20 City Council agenda, under Department Deports, for Council's consideration: 1 Well No. _22 Test „Well Drilling. This agreement with Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. is for drilling a test well near the future production well in the Bear Creek Park. Stevens and Sons has completed at least six test wells for the City during the last We years. Information from the test well will be used to design the production well that will be drilled later this spring. The agreement will be on a time and materials basis not to exceed $24,900. Recommended Council Action: Award the contract for drilling the Bear Creek test well to Stevens and Sons Well Drilling, Inc. for a time and material amount not -to -exceed of $24,900 and authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the contract 2) Well No. 22 Pumping Facilities 6greement For Professional Services. This agreement with Civil Survey Consultants is to provide design and construction services for Well No. 22 in the Bear Creek Park. The design fee is $16,020.00 and the construction services fee is $0,830.00, both on a time and materials/not-to- exceed aterials/not to - exceed basis. Civil Survey Consultants has provided these services on at least four similar projects in the last five years. A copy of the agreement is enclosed. Recommended Council Action: Award the contract for Well Facilities Professional Services Agreement to Civil Survey Consultants in the amount of $'18,020.00 for design and $u,a;soxu for construction services and Brad Watson, P.E. Assistad City En&m Meridian Public Works Dqxwtment 200 E. Cadton SL, Suite 100 Merkdian, Idaho &3642-2600 No. 22 Pumping From the desk of.. (208) 887-2211 Fax (208) 887-1297 0 Page 1 waL%oub@ci.neridianJdus €t authorize Mayor to sign and city Clerk to attest the agreement 3) Contract ,Award for WWTP Standby „Generator Procurement. The Public Works Department, with the assistance of Taylor Engineers, solicited bids for a 406 KW standby generator for the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Two bids were received and are as follows: EC Power Systems $517613.34 Cummins Intermountain $54,467.85 The bid prices are near estimates and within budget. The generator will be installed as part of a larger electrical upgrade project later this spring that is currently under design by Taylor Engineers. Recommended Council Action: Award of the procurement contract to EC Power Systems for the W rP Standby Generator in the amount of $51,613.34 and authorize Mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest the contract 4) Digester & Clarifier Facilities Pro'ect A reement For Com leton. This agreement defines the terms of closing out the project with Tum -Key, Inc. Specifically, it defines the status of Change orders #4 - #6, a revised deadline by which all remaining work must be completed, and redefines liquidated damages if the work is not completed by that deadline. I have reviewed the agreement with Bill Nichols and I believe he is safisfied with it A copy of the agreement is enclosed. Recommended Council Action: authorize mayor to sign and City Clerk to attest Agreement for Completion with Turn -Key, Inc. for the Digester & Clarifier Facilities project Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding any of these items, 0 Page 2 rem Packet PickuN .......... . PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE Jam' ZO •` D / #-` PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PUBLIC HEARING � SIGN-UP SHEET DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME NAME FOR AGAINST OS�V E E��CE- Aye 0 L DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET \� N ��cPoo�as3 NAND E FOR AGAINST, >1 r " � r tl e2 L I'S 2d F` J'- � v 1. PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE "";7 PROJECT NUMBER #42 PROJECT NAME d'Lvh G�C� cX.. �J� dl ✓��i o� NAME FOR AGAINST PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE � �� "-O � 13 PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME NAME FOR AGAINST DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET / 2,--069-69z7 0�� NAME.----- :"sl,�,u,� FOR AGAINST DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET %P-ov-o�8 NAME FOR AGAINST S'A At%l d PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME NAME FOR AGAINST PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME NAME FOR AGAINST PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE PROJECT NUMBER PROJECT NAME �/�v°✓t.TF�� Ce2/���E �eqZ�f� NAME FOR AGAINST E PUBLIC HEARING SIGN-UP SHEET DATE PROJECT NUMBER TDD Z---- PROJECT NAME �'I/r/�22 fG�n-e- C.d��m �-e- COEM=" 2�.�"`-' NAME FOR AGAINST FEE -15-2001 10:40 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12003452950 P.04 PARTIES: 1. 2. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT City of Meridian Victory 41, LLC, OwneVDeveloper THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement"), is made and entered into this ZZL4_ day of-_,ejX110k1 2000, by and between CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipal corporation of the State of Idaho, hereafter called "CITY", and VICTORY 41, LLC, hereinafter called "OWNER/DEVELOPER", whose address is 6874 Fairview, Boise, Idaho 83704. RECITALS: 1.1 WHEREAS, "Owner" is the sole owner, in law and/or equity, of certain tract of land in the County of Ada, State of Idaho, described in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, herein after referred to as the "Property; and 1.2 WHEREAS, I.C. §67-6511A, Idaho Code, provides that cities may, by ordinance, require or permit as a condition of rezoning that the owner or "Owner/Developer" make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject "Property"; and 1.3 WHEREAS, "City" has exercised its statutory authority by the enactment. of Ordinance 11-15-12 and 11-16.4 A, which authorizes development agreements upon the annexation and/or re -zoning of land; and 1.4 WHEREAS, "Owner/Developer" has submitted an application for annexation and coning of the "Property"s described in Exhibit A, and has requested a designation of Low Densit. Residential District LR -41, (Meridian City Code §§ 11.7.2 C); and DEVF,LOPMENTAGREEMENT(AZ-00-010) - I FEB -15-2001 10:40 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12083452950 P.05 1.5 WHEREAS, "Owner/Developer" made representations at the public hearings both before the Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission and before the Meridian City Council, as to how the subject "Property" will be developed and what improvements will be made; and 1.6 `WHEREAS, record of the proceedings for the requested annexation and zoning designation of the subject "Property" held before the Planning & Zoning Commission, and subsequently before the City Council, include responses of government subdivisions providing services within the City of Meridian planning jurisdiction, and received further testimony and comment; and 1.7 WHEREAS, City Council, the _ day of __, 2000, has approved certain findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order, set forth in Exhibit $, which are attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full, hereinafter referred to as (the "Findings"); and WHEREAS, both the "Findings" require the ",.;'Owmer/Developer" to enter into a development agreement before the City Council takes final action on annexation and'zoning designation; and 1.9 "DEVELOPER" deems it to be in its best interest to be able to enter into this Agreement and acknowledges that this Agreement was entered into voluntarily and at its urging and requests; and 1,10 WHEREAS, "City" requires the "Owner/Developer" to enter into a development agreement for the purpose of ensuring that the "Property" is developed and the subsequent use of the "Property" is in accordance with the cerins and conditions of this development agreement, herein being established as a result of evidence received by the "City" in the proceedings for annexation and zoning DEVELOPMENTAGRrEMENT(AZ•00-010) -2 FEB -15-2001 10:41 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12083452950 P.06 designation from government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction and from affected property owners and to ensure annexation and zoning designation is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance #629, January 4, 1994, and the Zoning and Development Ordinances codified in Meridian City Code Title 1 I and Title 12. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows: 2. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS: That the above recitals are contractual and binding and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 3- DEFINITIONS: For all purposes of this Agreement the following words, terms, and phrases herein contained in this section shall be defined and interpreted as herein provided for, urdess the clear context of the presentation of the same requires otherwise: 3.1 "CITY": means and refers to the City of Meridian, a party to this Agreement, which is a municipal Corporation and government subdivision of the state of Idaho, organized and existing by virtue of law of the State of Idaho, whose address is 33 East Idaho Avenue, Meridian, Idaho 83642. 3.2 "DEVELOPER"/"OWNER": means and refers to Victory 41, LLC, whose address is 6874 Fairview Avenue, Boise, Idaho 83704, the party developing said "Property' and shall include any subsequent owner(s)/developer(s) of the "Property". 3.3 "PROPERTY": means and refers to that certain parcel(s) of "Property" located in the County of Ada, City of Meridian as described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth at length. DFVELOPMENr AGREEMENT (AZ -00-010) -3 FEB -15-2001 10:41 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12003452950 P.07 4. USES PERMITTED BX THIS AGREEMENT: 4.1 The uses allowed pursuant to this Agreement are only those uses allowed under "City"'s Zoning Ordinance codified at Meridian City Code Sections 11-7-2 C which are herein specified as follows: (R-4) Low Density Residential District: Only single- family dwellings shall be permitted and no conditional uses shall be permitted except for planned residential development and public schools. The purpose of the R-4 District is to permit the establishment of low density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those areas where predominantly residential development has, or is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, and to protect the integrity of residential areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible nonresidential uses. The R-4 District allows for a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre and requires connection to the Municipal water and sewer systems of the City. For the construction: and development of single family residential subdivision. 4.2 No change in the uses specified in this Agreement shall be allowed without modification of this Agreement. CONDITIONS GOVERNING DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: 5.A "Developer"/"Owner" shall enter into a Development Agreement, that provides in the event the conditions therein are not met by the Developer that the property shall be subject to de -annexation, with the City of Meridian which provides for the following conditions of development to -wit: DGVIELQPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-010) -4 FEB -15-2001 10:42 BRIGGS ENGINEERING. INC. 12083452950 P.08 5.1 A minimum 20 -foot landscape buffer beyond all right-of- way on E. Victory Road shall be required as a condition of annexation. 5.2 The 20 foot landscape buffer along the west side of the development may be waived if applicant provides proof to the Planning and Zoning Department that the commercial activity consisting of an adjacent gravel pit has ceased, is under a plan of reclamation, and is likely to be converted to residential use in the foreseeable future_ In the absence of such proof, the 20 foot landscape buffer as recommended by City Staff must be installed as a condition of final plat approval. 6. COMPLIANCE PERIOD/ CONSENT TO REZONE: This Agreement and the commitments contained herein shall be terminated, and the zoning designation reversed, upon a default of the "Developer"/"Owner" or "Developer"'s/"Owner's" heirs, successors, assigns, to comply with Section 5 entitled "Conditions Governing Development of subject "Property' of this agreement within two years of the date this Agreement is effective, and after the "City" has complied with the notice and hearing procedures as outlined in T.C. § 67.6509, or any subsequent amendments or recodifications thereof. T CONSENT TO DE -ANNEXATION AND REVERSAL OF ZONING DESIGNATION "Developer "/"Owner" consents upon default to the de -annexation and/or a reversal of the zoning designation of the "Property" subject to and conditioned upon the following conditions precedent to -/grit.: Ti That the "City" provide written notice of any failure to comply with this Agreement to "Developer"/"Owner" and if the "Developer"/"Owner" fails to cure such failure within six (6) months of such notice. 8. INSPECTION: "Developer"/"Owner" shall, immediately upon completion of any portion or the entirety of said development of the "Property" as required by this agreement or by City ordinance or policy, notify DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-010) -5 FEB -15-2001 10:42 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12093452950 P.09 the City Engineer and request the City Engineer's inspections and written approval of such completed improvements or portion thereof in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Development Agreement and all other ordinances of the "City" that apply to said Development, 9. DEFAULT: 9.1 In the event "Developer"/"Owner", "Developer"'s/"Owner's" heirs, successors, assigns, or subsequent owners of the "Property" or any other person acquiring an interest in the "Property", fail to faithfully comply with all of the terms and conditions included in this Agreement in connection with the "Property", this Agreement may be modified or terminated by the "City" upon compliance with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. 9.2 A, waiver by "City" of any default by "Developer'"/"Owner" of any one or more of the covenants or conditions hereof shall apply solely to the breach and breaches waived and shall not bar any other rights or remedies of "City" or apply to any subsequent breach of any such or other covenants and conditions. 10. REQUIREMENT FOR RECORDATION: "City" shall record either a memorandum of this Agreement or this Agreement, including all of the Exhibits, at "Developer-'s/"Owner's" cost, and submit proof of such recording to "Developer'T'Owner', prior to the third reading of the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the "Property" by the City Council. If for any reason after such recordation, the City Council fails to adopt the ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the "Property" contemplated hereby, the "City" shall execute and record an appropriate instrument of release of this Aheetnent. 11. ZONING: "City" shall, following recordation of the duly approved Agreement, enact a valid and binding ordinance zoning the "Property" as specified herein. DEVELOPMENT AGYRFF.MENT (AL -00-010) - 6 FEB -15-2001 10:43 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12083452950 P.10 12. REMEDIES: This Agreement shall be enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction by either "City" or "Developer"I"Owner", or by any successor or successors in title or by the assigns of the parties hereto. Enforcement may be sought by an appropriate action at law or in equity to secure the specific performance of the covenants, agreements, conditions, and obligations contained herein. 12.1 In the event of a material breach of this Agreement, the parties agree that "City" and "Developer"/"Owner" shall have thirty (30) days after delivery of notice of said breach to correct the same prior to the non -breaching party's seeking of any remedy provided for herein; provided, however, that in the case of any such default which cannot with diligence be cured within such thirty (30) day period, if the defaulting party shall commence to cure the same within such thirty (30) day period and thereafter shall prosecute the curing of same with diligence and continuity, then the time allowed to cure such failure may be extended for such period as may be necessary to complete the curing of the same with diligence and continuity. 12.2 In the event the performance of any covenant to be performed hereunder by either "Developer"/"Owner" or "City" is delayed for causes which are beyond the reasonable control of the party responsible for such performance, which shall include, without limitation, acts of civil disobedience, strikes or similar causes, the time for such performance shall be extended by the amount of time of such delay. 1.3. SURETY OF PERFORMANCE: The "City" may also require surety bonds, irrevocable letters of credit, cash deposits, certified check or negotiable bonds, as allowed under Meridian City Code §12-5-3, to insure that installation of the improvements, which the "Developer' agrees to provide, if required by the "City". 14. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY: The "Developer"/"Owner" agrees that no Certificates of Occupancy will be issued until all improvements DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-010) -7 FEB -15-2001 10:43 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12083452950 P.11 are completed, unless the "City' and "Developer"/"Owner" have entered into an addendum agreement stating when the improvements will be completed in a phased developed; and in any event, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued in any phase in which the improvements have not been installed, completed, and accepted by the "City". 15. ABIDE BY ALL CITY ORDINANCES: That "Developer"/"Owner" agrees to abide by all ordinances of the City of Meridian and the "Property" shall be subject to de -annexation if the owner or his assigns, heirs, or successors shall not meet the conditions contained in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, this Development. Agreement, and the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. 16. NOTICES: Any notice desired by the parties and/or required by this Agreement shall be deemed delivered if and when personally delivered or three (3) days after deposit in the United States Mail, registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt. requested, addressed as follows: CITY: c/o City Engineer City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, ID 83642 with copy to: City Clerk City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Ave. Meridian, 117 83642 OWNER/DEVELOPER: Victory 41, LLC 6874 Fairview Avenue Boise, Idaho 83704 16.1 A party shall have the right to change its address by delivering to the other party a written not'ificat'ion thereof in accordance with the requirements of this section. 17, ATTORNEY FEES: Should any litigation be commenced between the parties hereto concerning this Agreement, the prevailing party DEVEI,OPMEW AGREL;MEAT (AZ -00.010) - 8 FEB -15-2001 10:44 BRIGGS ENGINEERING. INC. 12083452950 P.12 shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief as may be granted, to court costs and reasonable attorney's fees as determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction. This provision shall be deemed to be a separate contract between the parties and shall survive any default, termination or forfeiture of this Agreement. 18, TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE: The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that time is strictly of the essence with respect to each and every term, condition and provision hereof, and that the failure to timely perform any of the obligations hereunder shall constitute a breach of and a default under this Agreement by the other party so failing to perform. 19. BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS: This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties' respective heirs, successors, assigns and personal representatives, including "City"'s corporate authorities and their successors in office. This Agreement shall be binding on the owner of the "Property", each subsequent owner and any other person acquiring an interest in the "Property". Nothing herein shall in any way prevent sale or alienation of the "Property", or portions thereof, except that. any sale or alienation shall be subject to the provisions hereof and any successor owner or owners shall be both benefitted and bound by the conditions and restrictions herein expressed. "City agrees, upon written request of "Developer", to execute appropriate and recordable evidence of termination of this Agreement if "City", in its sole and reasonable discretion, had determined that "Developer" has fully performed its obligations under this Agreement. 20. INVALID PROVISION: If any provision of this Agreement is held not valid by a court of competent. jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed to be excised from this Agreement and the invalidity thereof shall not affect any of the other provisions contained herein. 21. FINAL AGREEMENT: This Agreement sets forth all promises, inducements, agreements, condition and understandings between "Owner/Developer" and "City" relative to the subject matter hereof, and there are no promises, agreements, conditions or understanding, either oral or written, express or implied, between "Owner/Developer" and "City', other than as are stated herein. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent. DEVELOPMENT AGRF.EMFNT (AZ -00-010) -9 FEB -15-2001 10:44 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. 12083452950 P.13 alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto unless reduced to writing and signed by them or their successors in interest or their assigns, and pursuant, with respect to "City", to a duly adopted ordinance or resolution of "City". 21.1 No condition governing the uses and/or conditions governing development of the subject "Property" herein provided for can be modified or amended without the approval of the City Council after the ""City" has conducted public hearing(s) in accordance with the notice provisions provided for a zoning designation and/or amendment in force at the time of the proposed amendment. 22. EFFECTIVE DATE OF AGREEMENT: This Agreement shall be effective on the date the Meridian City Council shall adopt the amendment to the Meridian Zoning Ordinance in connection with the annexation and zoning of the "Property" and execution of the Mayor and City Clerk - DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-0 10) -10 FEB -15-2001 10:45 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 12083452950 P.14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have herein executed this agreement and Made it effective as hereinabove provided. Attest: Managing Member BY RESOLUTION NO. VICTORY 41, LLC B Managing Member CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: ad,� ert . Come Attest- S City Clerk BY RESOLUTION NO. Ipprv� by bel �'o c� 3-2v o DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (A7,.-00-010) - 11 FEB -15-2001 10:45 STATE OF IDAHO COUNTY OF ADA BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. :ss 12083452950 ZFb � n this day of _/il ( in the year -2000, before me, LV - a Notary Public, personally appeared MfGGtuPi( . VPM, and known or identified to me to be the Managing Members of Victory 41, LLC, who executed the instrument on behalf of said Limited Liability Corporation and acknowledged to me having executed the same_ (SEAL) Notaryub c for I aho Commission expires: STATE OF IDAHO :ss County of Ada) 200/ On this oz/ day of 19117'-C in the year 24900; before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared Robert D. Corrie and William G. Berg, know or identified to me to be the Mayor and Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, who executed the instrument or the person that executed the instrument of behalf of said City, and acknowledged to me that such City executed the same. 910•uuWA fta op! .`Y 1V•••• At40 ;111 (SEAL) * .OTA :•� %�n �.AU8L1 G 'r y•'• • �O .0 7OF I'D DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (AZ -00-010) - 12 J No ry PubIic for Idaho C mission expires: �o a P.15 FEB -15-2001 10:45 BRIGGS ENGINEERING, INC. EXHIBIT A Legal Descri tion Of Property 12093452950 P.16 A parcel of land being the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 19, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of the SW 1/4 (south 1/4 comer) of Section 19, T. 3N., R. IE., B,M., the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING of this description; Thence S 89042'45" W 1,320.43 feet to the southwest corner of the SE 1/4 of the SW I/4; Thence N 002939" E 1,329.84 feet to the northwest corner of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4; Thence N 89944'30" E 1,322.27 feet to the northeast corner of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4; Thence S 0°34'26" W 1,329,19 feet to the REAL POINT" OF BEGINNING of this description; Said parcel of land contains 40.33 acres more or less. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (A7.-00-010) -13 rCo-1p-CUU1 lU.4o GKIU= CINU I INCCK I INUI 4N-. 1LUti34JL7DU F.rr EXHIBIT B Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law/Conditions of Approval 7,•\Work\MWeridi= 15360M1Victory 41 AZ PP VARUDeveloaAsr DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT(AZ-00-010) -14 TOTAL P.17