Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999 01-05 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 5, 1999- 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL: +RON ANDERSON X' CHARLIE ROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY )( KEITH BIRD X MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE CONSENT AGENDA A. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 15, 1998: Clffh:JV~ B. ORDINANCE #808 - PRIVATE SECURITY SERVICES: 6ff>'--oV.fl.- C. APPROVE BILLS: ~fProv..e....- REGULAR AGENDA 1. RECOGNITION OF RETIRING VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS: pre 5 ~a.:r-/"O;V 2. TABLED DECEMBER 15,1998: BID RESULTS FOR GOVERNMENT UTILITIES BILLINGS SYSTEM: r-II..!L-3 / () approve... I awCVl..d.. /x'd.. h> Cafe/Ie J fl1c. -nn- 7. 'j u90. ~ 3. TABLED DECEMBER 15,1998: FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC - SW % SECTION 13 T. 3N., R. 1 W: ?VJ1J7rove tvlrlL Cc77ldlh'Jn.zs 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY - EAST OF 603 PINE: .. t:lfJProv-~ /!F-1' elL ~ ~ ~fdPCfr'/1nI- 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 2.84 ACRES FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY - EAST OF 603 P~?-pve ~/I'-' { c/{ ~ ~ 01- d:eC4J~h.J 6. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: t'(ccept- CJ:.f fpfil'-h-f ~a.ftbe J'u6~I'')fRe:L fz; lL~jJ//cg"..;t- 7. ORDINANCE #809 - ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: c~ ~ 'fo /-;CfJ/'f e(e rh"-?-. / S7 /UA_~ ;--. ( 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 5.4 ACRES FOR PROPOSED MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION BY HUBBLE ENGINEERING - NW OF EAGLE ROAD / 1-84 INTERCHANGE AND WEST OF EXISTING TEXACO: ftL -6JPe-~ piA re-no/7~ 9. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: /~ ~Ue~? 2--2--41 ~-In1- 10. ORDINANCE #810 - ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: /. nJe,_ ~ ~ 2-2-99 C-fL'---r~ 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.2 ACRES BY ROBERT F. BEEDE- 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: p;.p proy-~ 12. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: t:fdd.L 13. ORDINANCE #811 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING 800 W. OVERLAND R~~t.(L adn:n- Ie 1-ltf-q9 c/c~~ 1.lf.7 r.ljlj;{/H.:J 14. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.30 ACRES BY QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. - % MILE WEST OF OVERLAND FROM MERIDIAN-KUNA ROAD SOUTH SIDE BORDERING WEST SIDE OF RO-HO ENT.: vppnv-~ -//~(c-IL 15. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .96 ACRES (OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK) BY RAY ROBNETT - 3036 LANARK STREET: tlf/Prov~ ~ / ~ f c( L 16. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: ~ 17. ORDINANCE #812 - ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: c~r^-i)}z~fo /-IClJf9 f 2-2--99 (S-P reAd/~ 18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GENERAL AUTO REPAIR & SERVICE BY JOHN BISS - WEST OF MERIDIAN ROAD: /' //./ / a~!f ~ ~jJ~ cr-/T r C{ t 19. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.84 ACRES BY PAUL A. HOFFMAN (MERIDIAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH) - SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND USTICK: /J ~ C~ /JIll 1!0-~ re~ appe/~b?---/1:> rfZ-~~- 20. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 4.296 ACRES FOR PROPOSED SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. ( ('C-- WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES) LLC - SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: /:/ r_A / ~r~ ~~~ r-/,-..,.c.,fl. PUBLIC H~RING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES) LLC - SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: cep;rn--o~ tv~ ~c(/n~ PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3 BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - NORTH OF PINE & WEST OF LOCUST GROVE: -'l-ppJ""Ov€. t..J1rA- ~h~ REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY TODD MASON D/B/A MOXIE JAVA -106 E. WILLIAMS: arrro~ WATER I SEWER / TRASH DELINQUENCIES: apprzo~ DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. RON ANDERSON: B. DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION FOR ARCHITECT SELECTION FOR NEW FIRE STATION: ~V'<- 2.611 GARY SMITH: C. 1. DIGESTER FACILITIES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT TO EXISTING KELLER ASSOCIATES DESIGN CONTRACT: ~p;{:TrCJV~ 2. CONTRACT DRILLING OF EXPLORATORY WATER TEST- WELL AT CITY WELL NO.8 (STEVENS & SONS WELL DRILLING, INC.): ~rt7V'<- 3. CONTRACT FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING OF PUMP AND PUMPHOUSE FOR CITY WELL NO. 18 IN SUMMERFIELD SUBDIVISION (CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS, INC.): ~rov .R.--- 4. BID RESULTS FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES: ~YX. Cad~ eee~ J.ef-y/0 BILL GIGRAY: D. APPROVAL OF RESPONSE LETTER TO THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: ~tJv~ tv/If\.. Cd)rl.~ WILL BERG: ( ( REQUEST BY D'ARLENE STUZMAN REGARDING VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: ~I c-. /ha1n Corr/e.- - 1- /(eJ~t>l:nJ /1 20 9 fJ.;ppn>v..e...e0 z- w~d..,. ~f~h~ .#171-- - Pr-f di5~fUt( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 5. 1999 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. on January 5, 1999 by Mayor Corrie. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree. OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Bill Gigray, Bill Gordon, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Kenny Bowers, John Shawcroft, Mayor Bob Corrie. Corrie: Council you have the consent agenda in front of you. Are there any verifications on the consent agenda? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move we pull item B and hold it for discussion after item number one on the regular agenda. Rountree: I'll second. Corrie: Motion is made and second that we pull Ordinance No. 808 and put it as item number two. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for consent agenda with Ordinance 808 removed. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion we approve the consent agenda items. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Bird that we approve the consent agenda items without Ordinance 808. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 1. RECOGNITION OF RETIRING VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS: Bowers: Mayor and City Council we have retired some of our firefighters. They have moved out of the district or have other projects going and have not been able to make our Tuesday night meetings, so we have come up with a different kind of a program now for certain years. Certain years we give plaques, certain years we give lanterns, other years we give axes, so this year is the first we're going to do this and we would like for you guys to help us out on this. Would Bob Corrie come forward here. Would Dave Atkinson come forward please. Three years of service. Brian Delange, he's not here. He's got three years of service. Kevin Newberry, would you come forward. Kevin has four years of service. Tony Ewing. Tony has four years of service. Tommy Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 2 Tebolt five years of service and Tom Vincent come forward please. We hope Tom has got a big wall to put this on. Twenty years of service plus for Tom Vincent. This kind of got started this year with Rod Shaul coming and wanting to do a little different for the retired people. Johnny Geisler got together and got the awards in and they didn't make it for our Christmas party so that's why we would like them to come tonight and present to them in front of the Council and the people. As you know every Tuesday night from 7:00 until 10:00 they're over there putting in a lot of hours, and I know a plaque isn't a lot of stuff but it is a little appreciation for us. Thank you guys for them come in tonight. Come: Thank you Kenny. I just want to say congratulations to the people that got their awards and also the other firemen here tonight. We really appreciate what you're doing and thank you very, very much. Anyone else from the Council would like to - Anderson: Mr. Mayor I would just like to echo some of those sentiments. As you were reading off the years of service, I was totally some of that up and I come up with just 39 or 40 years worth of service to the community here. I know a lot of these fellows. I've worked closely with them and I know the dedication it takes to do this for that many years and the amount of time and on behalf of myself and the rest of the Council I'd say we deeply appreciate you guys and wish you good luck in whatever it is that you're going to pursue now, and thank you for your time and efforts. Corrie: Okay the Ordinance #808 the private security services from the consent agenda has been pulled and will be open at this time. Council comments, questions? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I had not seen or heard of this ordinance and speaking with the Chief he had not seen it either before today and I'd just like to know how it came about and who was the author of it and get some background on it. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, this particular ordinance exists in your books today. It's not a new ordinance. This is an amendment of the existing section of the municipal code of the city. The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to bring the amount of liability insurance coverage which is required in conformance with state law as it exists in terms of city's liability and this issue came about by reason of the fact that there were some applications made to the clerk's office for these types of security service license applications and they didn't have a form to process the applications but we had a city ordinance that governed it and I believe you have attached to your packet here a copy of the proposed application form to be used. That's not part of the ordinance. I just noticed that the existing ordinance was the old 300,000 provision that was the old tort claim liability which has been changed to single limit 500,000, so I thought we should bring it current. So you are just to help familiarize you, when you see an ordinance that's proposing an amendment to existing code you will see at the heading that's it's an amendment of the existing chapter. You will also see the strike throughs and additions so those items which are stricken through means that that Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 3 portion of the ordinance would be deleted by this amendment and those items which are underlined will be that portion that will be placed in its stead. Corrie: Any other questions of Council? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I just have a question for the Chief. On the application form that's been attached I trust this was drafter by you Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Yeah, in working with the Clerk's office. Bentley: Is everything on there that you feel needs to be on there? Gordon: I've got enough information there to do a background investigation Councilman. Bentley: Thank you. I have nothing further Gigray: I would just further add with your permission Mr. Mayor that we tried to make the application follow the existing ordinance. We didn't really try to change the rest of the ordinance and certainly would accept any comment the police department or anyone else might have to revise this whole section. We're not attempting to do that. We're just trying to bring that insurance coverage current. Corrie: Will, what's the ordinance number would this be? 808, any further discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay hearing none I will entertain a motion for approval of Ordinance 808 Private Security Services. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the amendment to Ordinance 808 section 8-2208(b) of the Private Security Services Ordinance. Bird: Do you waive the three public readings? Rountree: Don't need it on a - Bird: It's an ordinance. Rountree: With suspension of rules. Bird: I'll second that. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 4 Corrie: Motion been made to accept Ordinance #808 item number b with suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of - ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson, yea. Bentley, yea. Rountree, yea. Bird, yea. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bird: Mr. Mayor, Counsel says we have to vote on the ordinance now that we have amended it. Gigray: Now that you've just waived the reading. Bird: Now we have to vote on it. We have waived the three readings of it. Now we have to vote on the Ordinance 808. Rountree: Motion was to approve the amendment with suspension of rules. Gigray: Okay just so the record reflects, you've taken both those actions. Corrie: Yeah, both actions under one vote. 2. TABLED DECEMBER 15, 1998: BID RESULTS FOR GOVERNMENT UTILITIES BILLINGS SYSTEM: Corrie: I believe this is your John. John if you would like to give us some information on this. Shawcroft: I think there were some questions you gentlemen had last time that we're going to try and answer for you. I apologize that I wasn't here to do that for you. Gary Smith tried to answer to questions, but he was not involved actively with this particular bid. Basically the bids came in from Cassell Springbrook and Census. They are a window based billing system. There was some concerns that we had with making sure that we compared the products on an even basis. So what we did is actually make sure that all the training was included that all the data conversion was there so that we give you gentlemen something that you could confidently vote on. Corrie: John, I had a question and I think Council did too. One is on this training of eight people. There was training fees and then travel, lodging and meals and transportation. How many days of training is that? Shawcroft: That's five days. Basically Springbrook and Cassell did not include the training in their bid. Census did because it was on-site. Springbrook and Cassell will Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 5 tell you that that bid of $7,000 and $10,000 respectively is at their site and they did not include any travel for our people to go down and do that. Cowie: Now if they came out here for five days, they charged $5,000; is that correct? Shawcroft: That's correct, sir. Corrie: Plus the travel. How many people does that include? Shawcroft: For the trainer, that's one if he comes on site. Cowie: So we figure that it's $5,000 and then his travel to and from. Shawcroft: Correct. Whereas if we send them off site, we're probably three to five people sharing motel rooms and it comes out fairly close. Cowie: Council any further questions? Anderson: Our question last time John was is there a possibility that we could bring their trainers out here and find a computer lab or something and rent it here and how would it affect our operation if we send all eight people at one time to go take this training. Is that feasible or is it going to be broke up over a couple of different time periods and is it going to affect our day to day operation of the billing department? Shawcroft: They will if we want them to both Springbrook and Cassell will come on site and do the training here if we so desire. From what we saw with the accounting system when it came on line, there was a great deal of trouble with that training with interruptions. Those people have important jobs, and it just seemed to be that they were interrupted a lot. If we sent people down we did consider sending people after a billing cycle so that we can send maybe five people, leave a skeleton crew and just get by until they got back. Anderson: So we could send them like in two different groups too maybe to get - we want to train 8 eight people; is that right? Shawcroft: I think that's the number that we were using, but I think not necessarily so. Anderson: We have less than that? Shawcroft: Yeah, we could actually get by with less because some of the people that go down there are supervisors and they can come back and train the people who work for them. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 6 Anderson: So we could send them all in one group and not interrupt our service? Shawcroft: Right. We were just using 8 because that's what Census used was 8 people for training you know training 8 people and so we wanted to make sure that dollar figure actually represented what we're getting, so that we weren't favoring one vendor over another. Anderson: So the money that's in their bid for travel, lodging, meals, transportation, that's for their people. Shawcroft: If it is for Census, it's for their people. And I think it depends on how you look at it. If we send our people remotely to the remote location, then the city will pay that out of pocket and the vendor won't receive anything. But if they come on site, then they will have their fee plus their travel expenses. Corrie: In my mind if we send out our people, we've got a $13,000 bill to send our people roughly. I mean it doesn't come out that high, but - Shawcroft: No. I think you know you actually can put two people in a motel room. Meals are not that expensive and flights from here to Salt Lake aren't that bad, so I think it would be considerably less. Corrie: Any other questions on the item number two? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Entertain a motion on the results of the government utilities billing system. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the bid for the government utilities billing system in the amount of $43,100 with Cassell, Inc. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to accept the price of $43,100 of Cassell, Inc. for the training. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 3. TABLED DECEMBER 15, 1998: FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC - SW'/< SECTION 13 T. 3N., R. 1 W: Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 7 Corrie: Staff comments first. Shari? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council we received the revised plat you just had placed before you tonight. I have had discussion with the developer and we worked out some of the issues. On the revised plat there is still a discrepancy in the ordinance it needs to be changed. It's minor and I think it can be completed. I would like on the record there to be some additional conditions on this plat that some of the issues may have to be worked out during the development plan review process as far as the landscape setback. Review that application I would want - I do want it on record that I am requesting and recommending that the 25 foot landscape setback beyond the right-of- way of the totally landscaped setback and that the fence be beyond that and that that is subject to design review approval by the Planning and Zoning Department. I would also like a note put on the plat that the homeowners association is responsible for maintenance of this landscape easement and that no fencing is to encroach the easement and that before recording of the final plat -before signature on the final plat that we review the recorded license agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and make sure appropriate notes are put on the plat about encroachment of that easement of fencing or any other structures. What you don't have in your packets is an additional page from the developer that has changed some of the square footages on Landing No. 10, which has already been approved. However we did not get the square footages of the housing resolved upon approval of that. It hasn't been signed yet. So they have submitted revised minimum square footages of the housing for Landing No. 10 and Landing No. 11 with this submittal that we are requesting to meet the ordinance requirements from 1991. Corrie: Any further comments from staff? Rountree: Are you going to repeat your statement or do you want me to read it again? Bentley: Shari, on this plat map we have here, I have a question on it. The title on it is Landing No. 11and down in the bottom of it, it shows Landing No. 10, Landing No. 9. Where is Landing No. 11? Stiles: The lots that are shown are Landing No. 11. That is what the plat is of. A requirement of state code is that they list the adjacent whether it's platted or unplatted or what those subdivision names are. Bentley: Okay that clarifies that and then a follow up at my request the previous meeting they were suppose to get with you and get all the problems straightened out. You're saying that hasn't been done? +,. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 8 Stiles: We haven't had a meeting in person. We discussed over the phone and discussed a lot of these issues. One of my - do you have my list of comments? Just to clarify where the questions were on the comments, on site specific number two, we had requested a six foot high permanent perimeter fence be required. And they have asked that phases ten and eleven be combined if they are going to develop those at the same time. Staff has no problem with them constructing the perimeter fence around the entire without requiring the temporary fencing. Number three, we had asked that the buffer area be platted as a common lot, however they would be below the minimum required square footages for the lots so we didn't request that, but we do request that the 25 foot landscape berm be provided and the fence be at that landscape setback. Site specific comment number four was in reference to the Idaho Transportation Department and what they had quoted about another project. We had not had a response from them on this project, but seeing as the approval was so long ago, I don't know how we could impose that requirement. I am very concerned about the buffering for this project. Everyone knows there is going to be another lane constructed westbound to Nampa, and I just don't want to see tax dollars spent on an 8 foot high concrete wall at that time when everyone knew full well when the development went in that that would be a requirement and that that would happen and that it would impact this development and that is why I'm so concerned about the buffer. The documentation, they have revised their house sizes as I said for Landing No. 10 and Landing No. 11 to meet the ordinance of 1991. It appears that all of the lots sizes now meet the minimum requirement. And I ask that all other comments stated here tonight and in our written comments would be incorporated into the approval. Rountree: Shari you had some comments previously and I'm not sure if it was on this one or one of the adjoining ones about the number of lots and sizes of houses on the particular lots as indicated on this plat. They have the house size shown, but minimum house size that would be shown allowed on the lots. You obviously haven't had this long enough to compute if that is consistent with our ordinance. Stiles: Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council, I did receive a revised square footages for Landing No. 10 that I did not have in your packets and they have - I have computed the percentages and they do meet the requirements of the 1991 ordinance. Rountree: Okay. Cowie: Any other comments from Council? Questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I would have a question of the developer or his engineer. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 9 B. Blazer: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, Bruce Blazer represent Mallard Landing LLC. Rountree: My question centers around the specifics of the barrier on the southern side of the proposed subdivision adjacent to I-84 and there's been some confusion about what's going to be there and what it is we want and I know you had some comments at the last meeting that we had only wanted a certain height barrier and you were proposing something more significant than that, and I would just like to know specifically what is being proposed there in terms of height of berm, fencing, and landscaping. B. Blazer: Well the plat requirement shows a 4 foot berm and 25 foot easement and in the letter that I gave you last time I indicated that we would like a much higher berm than that. I think currently we have a berm that's between six and eight feet tall. We have additional dirt that we were going to take out of the roads of phase 11 and place on that berm. To make it even taller, because we recognize that we need a barrier there to help take the noise away from the houses. The problem arises I think between our concept and staff in that staff wants us to place the fence on the 25 foot line and landscape the full 25 feet to the southern boundary to the property. We are proposing putting the fence on top of the berm and landscaping from the fence to the southern edge of the property. In discussing this with staff, we came to the conclusions we could move the berm to the north. It would encroach into the backyards of the homes that are there. To do that we wouldn't place as high a berm as we would if we could use the full 25 foot easement for the berm so there's sort of a trade off there. I think in design we're open to just about anything. We have to protect a little bit the backyards of the homes that will be built there, so we aren't in opposition to any advice that the Council wants to give to us and any direction that you want to place on us. Rountree: I personally would like to see that berm as high as you can get it and if you place the fence on top of the berm and landscape from the fence to the roadway right- of-way, that's consistent with some of the treatments that are further east along the interstate. My concern with that would be how would the homeowners or the homeowners association maintain that area. B. Blazer: The area within the 25 foot easement would be maintained by the homeowners association. Shari wants it placed on the face of the plat. We're also putting it in the covenants of the plat. So it would be maintained by the homeowners association. Rountree: And you indicated that the berm height at this point is approximating eight feet and going to be higher depending on how much more material you have to waste. B. Blazer: That's what we were planning on doing, yeah. l' Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 10 Rountree: Approximate ten feet? B. Blazer: Very easily could. If we take the slopes one to one, we could get a ten foot berm there. Rountree: That's a pretty steep slope to try to maintain something on. B. Blazer: It is on the freeway side you could landscape it to where your upkeep would be minimal. On the homeowners' side yes it would create a greater burden on the homeowners. Rountree: Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Bentley: None. Come: Thank you Mr. Blazer. Shari do you have any further comments in this from what you've heard? Stiles: I would just like to reiterate I would like the fence at the 25 foot line at the apex of whatever berm is provided and that it not be a one to one slope which would be pretty much impossible to maintain. Come: Any other questions Council? Rountree: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay, I'll entertain a motion on the item number three, final plat for the Landing No. 11. Either approve the motion, deny the motion, amend the motion and have the attorney prepare the proper order on it. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the final plat for the Landing No. 11 by Mallard Landing LLC with the conditions stated forth in the previous letter from Shari Stiles, P & Z Administrator and incorporate the conditions referred to tonight and order the attorney to prepare proper order. i Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 11 Bird: Second. Cowie: Motion is made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to approve the Landing LLC with the amendments asked for condition of staff and that the attorney ordered to prepare the proper order. Any further discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor just a point of clarification the specifics as far as the conditions go. We talked about some modifications and different kinds of conditions particularly as it related to the berm and slopes probably for the applicant as well and staff and Mr. Gigray. Tell them what you meant Glenn. Bentley: With regards to the berm as suggested by Shari and Councilman Rountree to have the berm raised to height to what they were discussing and have the fence on the berm and at the apex of the berm and at the 25 foot property line without the one to one slope. Rountree: Thanks. Cowie: Any further discussion? All those in favor as outlined by Mr. Bentley's motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY -EAST OF 603 PINE: Cowie: Direct staff to the notice that we got from Mr. Gigray, City Attorney, that states that you could take up item 4 and 5, then item six of the Council should receive the same approval and approve the draft form and then request the development agreement be submitted to the applicant for approval and further action of the City Council in this matter, and then item seven (Inaudible). Staff comments first. Shari? Stiles: I'm sorry Mr. Mayor and Council, I have not reviewed the Findings the variance however they were regarding the frontage on the lots. These lots are very deep and they've asked for a variance on the frontage for that reason. They do meet the minimum lot size easily for the zone they have requested which is R-8. It's a fairly straight forward project I believe. I have not looked at the development agreement either. I don't know if I have that in my packet. Items 4, 5, and 6 and 7 I have no particular problems with. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 12 Come: Council you have the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on item 4 in front of you along with the comments of the City Attorney. Anyone need any clarifications of the City Attorney's comments? Mr. Gigray would you please help us on this? Gigray: Item number 4 is simply before you for consideration because this way the action you took at the last meeting and I was just directed to do Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in conformance with your decision to grant the variance so what we do here in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as you can see is go through the basic requirements of your ordinance of the specific facts as it relates to this particular applicant who that is where the location of the property is, where it located and then some of the specifics about the request. The existing special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that would be in finding number 12 which is a condition precedent to granting the variance as I believe the evidence presented to you before was the fact that this was an infill project and due to its size and the street frontage availability there were economic circumstances on this parcel that would if this variance would weren't granted would leave a 2.5 acre parcel not developed or annexed and that strict compliance with the ordinance would result in inhibiting the achievements and objectives of your zoning ordinance and it wouldn't be detrimental finding 14 to public welfare or injurious to other property. There wasn't any testimony or any evidence to that effect and those findings just basically are there to ensure that evidence is presented that sets a basis for granting a variance. Conclusions of law are simply recitations of the appropriate city ordinance that govern this particular variance request and the decision or order is granting to the applicant and Virginia Jenson Family Trust is the owner here. Tony Hickey is an authorized agent for that Trust granting the platting variance and because the minimum street frontage and the particular lots I proposed in this decision and order to make reference to their specific drawing because it is that drawing that was the basis of this application rather than to set specific footages to lots that are not yet part of a final plat, and so that's why you see that order drafted that way. Bird: Thank you. Corrie: Any further discussion on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law? Rountree: I have none. Mr. Mayor I move that City Council approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision granting the variance for the Oliason Park Subdivision. Anderson: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision granting the variance. ROLL CALL VOTE: Bird, yea. Anderson, yea. Rountree, yea. Bentley, yea. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 13 MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 2.84 ACRES FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY -EAST OF 603 PINE: Cowie: Staff do you have any comments on this one? Gigray: Do you wish me to report on this since I drafted it Mr. Mayor? Cowie: Shari you don't have anything other than what you say? Hearing none, Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, based on the action taken by the City Council at your meeting on the 15t" of December, I have prepared the proposed Findings. Because this particular matter had Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law from Planning and Zoning Commission, you will see that your adoption of those Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the specific numbers read in relation thereto are identified in Finding of Fact three and four. The first portion the first two findings have to do with the fact that notice has been done in accordance with the law for your own public hearing, and then in conclusions of law this proposes as you took action that night to adopt the Planning and Zoning Commission's conclusion of law. I've moved six to a fact because I think it's more a fact than a conclusion of law. But in any event it is the same as it was presented to you and then I have added in conclusions of law two through four. Those specific statutory provisions that relate to the City Council's authority in this matter. And then in the decision and order granting annexation and zoning application, I have set forth specific conditions therein based on the record that I understood was made on the 15t" and that was that the applicant would need to prepare the legal description. We would prepare the appropriate ordinance of annexation and then that the developer enter into a development agreement that provided for specific conditions and then you will see part three thereof the litany and list of all of the conditions that would become part of the development agreement which we have drafted for your consideration which is the next item. Cowie: Further discussion? Then I will entertain a motion of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law request for annexation and zoning. Rountree: Mr. Mayor that the City Council approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting annexation and zoning application subject to the conditions as stated. Anderson: Second. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 14 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson (End of Tape) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, pursuant to the action that you just took, we have prepared a proposed drafter for development agreement which you have before you. This is a standard format form which I hope will become more familiar to you that we were using on these. Based on the action that the City Council took, we have not included and eliminated the lien language that was in some of the earlier forms. That is not part of this. This particular draft provides in section 4 the particular requirements of the development agreement which are specified in your order of decision. What we would request your consideration would be the approval of this form and then your direction that it be submitted to the developer for their review and signature and sent back pending your taking action on the annexation. Because the condition of the annexation and zoning is that they enter into the development agreement. Corrie: Questions Council? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we accept the development agreement for the Oliason Park Subdivision as to form and request that the draft be submitted to the applicant for signature. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley on the development agreement. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 7. ORDINANCE #809 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: Gigray: Mr. Mayor if you wish a little information this item. Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, because of the record of this matter and as part of your action approving the annexation and zoning and as I saw the record there is a requirement the applicant prepare the legal description for the annexation. To ensure that we have a legal description that will meet the requirements of the code and I recommend that we have those approved by our own Public Works Director, Gary Smith, to ensure that we don't get them kicked back from the State Tax Commission and that they are accurate. In Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 15 addition prior to passing this ordinance I recommend the development agreement be signed by the applicant and then back to this Council so that part is done prior to annexation, but I do believe that having the draft is important because you could sponsor this ordinance. Someone could get it on the table, do the first reading and then just put it on the table for continuance until the next meeting. The procedure I think should be followed if the development agreement isn't signed prior to the next Council meeting, then you could direct the clerk to just continue it on until that happens or you can proceed with the second reading because you could tier this out and still do it in stages, but you get it on the agenda, it stays there and it doesn't fall off. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have a question for Mr. Gigray. This particular type of ordinance only needs two readings not three? Gigray: No, all ordinances need three. I'm just saying at some particular stage of the proceedings you may determine you want to waive the remainder of the rule and proceed to passing it. Corrie: Mr. Gigray on the reading the ordinance, is it two times you read the first part and one reading is the entire ordinance or how is that done? Gigray: Usually my experience has been they just read the title that that suffices for reading the ordinance because the title of the -state statute prescribes and you'll see our titles tend to be a little bit long, but it says it should have all the essential points of the ordinance. If you have readings, you need to do that. At some point when you can waive the readings, you can just do that. Now you could elect in the future to place this on -well no, never mind, I'm thinking of something else. Bird: Mr. Mayor I have a question to ask. This ordinance is upon the developer agreeing to sign our development right? If he don't agree with that development agreement and stuff then this ordinance is null and void right? Gigray: No, what you've done is you've ordered the approval of the annexation and zoning, but the actual ordinance itself is the one that will annex the property. What you don't want to do is create an ambiguity by annexing the property and then have a developer decide they're not going to sign a development agreement and then you may be put in a position of having to go through a deannexation procedure which would be - Ijust don't think there's any reason why the city would want to put itself in that position. Bird: Why would we want to pass the ordinance without him signing the development agreement? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 16 Gigray: Well I would recommend that you not do that, but what you'll do by sponsoring it is you just get it on the agenda. for consideration because until you waive the rule and have the third reading, it's just on the agenda for further consideration. Bird: Can tonight be considered the first reading? Gigray: If you choose to do so or you may say I'm not ready to sponsor the ordinance yet. And you move on to the next agenda item, but I was thinking this would be a way. We've already prepared this. It gets it on the agenda and then the clerk will bring it back to you at the next Council meeting. Rountree: Could we not continue action on this particular ordinance until our next regularly scheduled meeting? Gigray: You certainly could. I just think it probably ought to have some sponsor in order to get it on the agenda, or I guess you could receive it from me and then you just put it on the -just table any further action at that point. You know it's a piece of legislation that should have a sponsor to have a place on the agenda. Rountree: I move that we continue action on Ordinance #809 until our next regularly scheduled meeting January 19~h, 1999. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to continue the Ordinance #809 and I assume tonight the first reading on that one. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Mr. Clerk would you like to read the title to Ordinance #809? Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor. (ORDINANCE #809 WAS READ) 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 5.4 ACRES FOR PROPOSED MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION BY RUBBLE ENGINEERING - NW OF EAGLE ROAD / I-84 INTERCHANGE AND WEST OF EXISTING TEXACO: Corrie: Shari, staff report and recommendations. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council you have received a letter from the applicant's representative regarding the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The condition Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 17 does still remain in the Findings that the conditional use permit will be required for each lot on the subdivision. The applicant's representative and I have not had time to sit down together and discuss the development agreement and we are also waiting from the applicant some covenants that can some of the conditions could be incorporated in the development agreement so I would request that you table items 8, 9 and 10 to your meeting of January 19, 1999. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move that we table items 8,9, and 10 concerning the Midvalley Business Park until January 19t", 1999. Bird: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to table items 8, 9, and 10 recommendation of staff until 1/19/99. Any further discussion? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council point of procedure. Given the comments received here it may be in the best interest of all to have the Council reopen the public hearing on this matter to receive the additional information. So that you have a record before you of that additional information so that you can make a final decision on this matter, and I believe the effected property owners would be entitled to notice of that because you cannot open a record back up once you've closed it unless you reopen it, but if you direct the City Clerk to reopen this or that you direct that this be reopened and that the Clerk give notice of continued public hearing and serve affected property owners, I believe we'd be in compliance with state law and our city ordinances to receive additional information. It's not a problem with the development agreement. It's not a problem with the preliminary plat. The issue has to do with the zoning designation and that's where we have the public hearing that first item for your consideration for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision in relation to zoning. Corrie: So we just need a public hearing on item 8 then? Gigray: Right I mean you just reopen the public hearing. You had one before and then you'll have to give the 15 day notice, which means you'll probably have to move this into February. Corrie: Do we need any motion to -well we better start all over again. Have Mr. Bentley remove his motion from the floor and then we get the second to - Bird: I remove my second. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move that for item number 8, Midvalley Business Park Subdivision that we instruct the Clerk to reopen and post the public hearing for the Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 18 Findings of Facts on the annexation and zonin~q, the 5.4 acres and schedule that for the first meeting in February, which is February 2" . Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to have item number 8 be reopened at the public hearing for the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to be given. The meeting would be February the 2"d, 1999. Any further discussion? Gigray: Just a point of information Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. I think all the clerk would need to do is just send notice of continued public hearing with the same notice he provided before. In other words, the application is the same. Nothing has changed there. There's no material change, but that notice will show that you will be receiving additional testimony at that point in time. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 9. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: 10. ORDINANCE #810 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for items 9 and 10. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move that we table items 9 and 10 concerning Midvalley Business Park development agreement and ordinance #810 until 2/2/99. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Anderson -point of order Mr. Attorney, can we go ahead and do that by putting new Findings and Facts out before we do that? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council I think it's a good idea to table it to a date certain. Whether or not we will be in a position to finalize all of those things at that point in time I don't know, but you can always table it back one more meeting and this kind of keeps it in attention, and I think it's probably a good motion. Corrie: Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 19 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.2 ACRES BY ROBERT F. BEEDE - 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: Corrie: Comments°from staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I don't see Mr. Beede here. I don't know if he has had an opportunity to look at the development agreement. I did not specifically request a development agreement. However, the Council can require that as a condition of the annexation. The reason I wasn't so concerned about a development agreement is that it's already existing. They are proposing some additions. Mr. Beede has been very cooperative in trying to meet whatever the city's needs are. If you remember the reason he's requesting annexation is because although he exists as a commercial business at this time he is not zoned to allow an expansion without either an additional conditional use permit or rezoning in the county and so he elected to hook up to city water service and become part of the city. Mr. Gigray may have additional information on the development agreement. Corrie: Any other staff report? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as I understood the action taken by the Council at the last meeting, I believe you wrestled with the idea of whether you needed a development agreement or not and as I understood the action was not to do so. So what you have before you are Findings which go through the same litany in terms of Findings of Fact with regards to your authority and the public hearing and notice and so on. You'll see in Finding number three, proposed Findings, you will incorporate the Findings and Conclusions of Law and the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission except you are amending and accepting finding number 19.2 and I'm referring to their findings to -it's just that detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant for improvement upon the subject property. This provides that they would be reviewed and approved by Planning and Zoning Commission and that all city ordinances be complied with and then under conclusions of law we're making the same findings there in that proposal. Then under the decision and order, you'll see in part three there that a detailed site plans are to be prepared and then this specifies the conditions of those detailed site plans, which starts with 3.1 through 3.11 which were what I found in the record were conditions that would have been considered for a development agreement. Corrie: So we can approve the final action on that and eliminate item 12; is that correct? Bird: Item 12 wouldn't need to be on the agenda would it Mayor? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 20 Corrie: No, we can just take it off. Gigray: And I can understand why those would be on there because those recommendations have come out of Planning and Zoning giving you the option either to go to detailed site plan route or through a development agreement and this was just one you took specific action on as I read the record. Corrie: So item number 11 we can use the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision Order granting -any further discussion? I'll entertain a motion on item number 11. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting annexation and zoning application subject to the conditions stated for the property at 800 W. Overland Road. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting annexation and zoning application subject to conditions stated in the motion. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: BIRD, YEA. ANDERSON, YEA. ROUNTREE, YEA. BENTLEY, YEA. MOTION CARRIED: All yeas. Corrie: With that being the case we can eliminate item number 12 on the agenda. 12. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that item number 12 on our agenda be deleted. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to delete item number 12 the development agreement 800 W. Overland Road. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 21 13. ORDINANCE #811 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, again this is an ordinance that's been prepared for annexation and zoning designation of light industrial for this particular application. My cautionary on this one is that I'd want to make sure that the Public Works Director is satisfied that the legal description is appropriate. I don't know that he's had an opportunity to review that. Whether he affirms that it is, again, if that's the case, you could simply follow the procedure you did on the first one and sponsor it, read it, put it on the agenda for passage at the next meeting pending its approval of the legal description. Corrie: Gary, comment. Smith: I have not reviewed the legal description, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Council can - Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we continue action on item 13 Ordinance #811 until our next regularly scheduled meeting January 19~", 1999 and have first reading of the ordinance this evening. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to have Ordinance #811 read by title and receive as the first reading sponsored by Mr. Rountree. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Berg: (ORDINANCE #811 WAS READ.) 14. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.30 ACRES BY QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. - Y4 MILE WEST OF OVERLAND FROM MERIDIAN-KUNA ROAD SOUTH SIDE BORDERING WEST SIDE OF RO-HO ENT.: Corrie: Staff report. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as you directed by reason of your action at the last Council meeting which effected a denial of the request for annexation and zoning in light of that directive have prepared for your consideration these Findings Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 22 of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order of denial. As you will see by going through this the Finding which is the most relevant with regards to your action has to do with the finding regarding the compatibility of this particular zone request as being inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the city and that is contained in finding number 16. The other findings that are here are consistent with the information which in 17~also deals with the inconsistency which has to do with the designation of this property on the Comprehensive Plan generalized land use map which shows presently single family residential. As a condition of zoning is that the zoning has to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Corrie: All right. Any other comments from staff? Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order of denial for the application for annexation of Queenland Acres, Inc. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order of denial on the request for annexation and zoning of Queenland Acres, Inc. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: BIRD, YEA. ANDERSON, YEA. ROUNTREE, YEA. BENTLEY, YEA. MOTION CARRIED: ALL YEAS. 15. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .96 ACRES (OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK) BY RAY ROBNETT - 3036 LANARK STREET: Gigray: As I recall my comment on this one is that there was a question concerning whether or not this would require a development agreement or whether or not it would be subject to approval of the site plan. We went ahead and prepared one just in case. (Inaudible) Bird: Mr. Mayor I was under the impression that we had done the same -this is already developed subdivision. I didn't think it went with the development agreement which I realize is the next agenda item. It says in here that on 3.14 that this is contingent upon a development agreement, but I thought we had waived that. I might be wrong. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 23 Corrie: I think we wrote it here that the applicant complies with all the city requirements. Such agreement will not be needed. I think he has in this case. Bird: 3.14 a development agreement should be required as a condition of annexation. Corrie: Shari any other questions of staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I think the only real issue that remained on this was the ditch issue and having staff and the applicant get together and work with whoever is in charge of that drain to determine the best course of action for future piping or non piping of that entire drainage area. That was the only ordinance requirement that there seemed to be a question on. Rountree: Shari or Gary refresh my memory so I can have it on tape, what's the size of pipe that we've normally deferred requiring tiling on? Is it 48? Stiles: It's 48 inch, and I think Nampa Meridian said it required a 36 inch pipe, but we still have questions about the recharge from the ground water in that I don't think Nampa Meridian even knows what kind of flow they really have. Rountree: I'm sure they don't. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Shari I don't believe that is not an irrigation ditch. That's a drain ditch isn't it that runs down there? There's water running in it year round. Stiles: It is - Bird: Something to do with the aquifer and stuff like a lot of the ground water coming to it and it fills. Stiles: It may be that some of the property owners in that area want to pipe it so they can reclaim that area because it is so deep and it does take - if they elected they could use that area, but I don't know that the staff would recommend doing that at this time without doing some research into it. Bird: I thought somebody said something about we needed to get the engineer of BLM or somebody in there to find out about that. Was it you Gary that mentioned that we need to get or Charlie? Rountree: I did and I don't know if that's been investigated either by Gary or Mr. - Smith: As I understand it it's not under the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers. Bruce Freckleton checked with Corps and it's not theirs. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 24 Bird: Whose ditch is it Gary? Smith: Well Nampa Meridian claims jurisdiction on it as far as maintenance goes, and you're right Councilman Bird. It is a subterranean drain and it is called the Evans Drain and it does have water in it year round and that's its function. If it was ever piped the pipe would need to be water gathering pipe, rather than just a water conveying pipe. At this point we don't really know what size pipe it would take. Nampa Meridian has said at one time that they did know. Then we received correspondence not too long ago from them that they don't know. I've asked for a clarification on that from their superintendent, but I haven't heard anything from him yet. Bird: Gary, in your professional opinion do you think 36 inch pipe would handle that? That's apretty - Smith: I guess opinions are plentiful and everyone has one. Bird: We can all be lawyers and have all kinds of opinions. Smith: I don't know that I could add any value to the conversation by venturing one Councilman Bird. I really don't know. The highway department, ITD, saw fit to reportedly install a 60 diameter culvert under Eagle Road, and I'm sure that they did that for some reason, and I don't know what it was, but for Nampa Meridian to come back and say we could do this in a 36 diameter pipe, I'm not sure what that comment is based upon. Bentley: As I stated in the previous meeting, we've already gone to the extent of having people bond. RC Willey's bonding for the same ditch, and I think that's the only thing we can do until we find out for sure what the requirement is going to be. Smith: Mr. Mayor one other thing that I might just toss out on the table. We are dealing with Nine Mile Drain to the south and west of this site, and on that drain because it was under the Corps of Engineers jurisdiction, we were very specific that no piping was allowed because of the reason that it is a drain, that it is accepting subsurface subterranean waters, and I don't know. There may have been some wildlife issues. I don't recall that specifically, but I do know that the Corps was very specific about not allowing it to be piped, and in looking at the two ditches, this is Evans Drain is much more of a drain than the Nine Mile Drain is at that point. Corrie: Any other questions? All right I'll entertain a motion. I need to ask Mr. Gigray is that 3.14 need to be in there or taken out? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 25 Bird: It's pretty clear Mayor. It says that as long as he complies with the city ordinance that we don't need a development agreement which the next item we would probably take care of that anyway. Gigray: I would need some direction from the Council because if you choose not to go with the development agreement route and you're determined to go the other way, then you're going to want to change part three of the decision and order because it says that the developer will enter into a development agreement and then there are all these series of conditions here. If this were a matter of presenting site plans for approval by Planning and Zoning, you could use the same language we used in the other one and you would just direct as part of your decision that that introductory phrase would be changed to that other language and then I would just resubmit this with that other language in there. In other the site approval by Planning and Zoning is -this was another one where it was submitted to either go by site approval or development agreement. Bird: We had approved to go by site development in the original had we not? Okay my motion has to delete the development agreement? Gigray: Yeah, you would just part three the introductory phrase here of the decision and order you would - Rountree: Mr. Mayor related to the discussion that we had about the piping, I'm not so sure that required piping is a good idea in that particular body of water, but to clarify the point in the findings, I would recommend that on page 5, item 16.12 last sentence of that paragraph, the first recommendation would be to spell Corps correctly. Spell check didn't catch that one. The last line engineers or the developer, insert or the developer provides an engineering study that the the size would be 48 inches, the size would be 48 inches or greater, or (inaudible) sufficient bond for future tiling. Make the same verbiage change on page 21 paragraph 3.12. Gigray: Yeah. Rountree: I'm giving the owner some more options. (Inaudible) Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting application for the annexation and zoning for the applicant Ray Robnett 3036 Lanark Street deleting all references to development agreement and inserting the appropriate language that would substitute for the development agreement lead ins and including the verbiage changes in paragraph 16.12 on page five paragraph 3.12 on page 21. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 26 Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting application of annexation and zoning on item number 15 with the deletions and insertions of the appropriate language as made in the motion. Gigray: Mr. Mayor point of information just to ensure that I would be following the action of the Council, what I would propose to do then would be to change the phrase in part three of the decision and order to read detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant of any improvement upon subject real property be reviewed and approved by Planning and Zoning Commission which plans will be complied with as follows and then it would just be that list. If that's what you wish to do. Rountree: I think it's superfluous and redundant that it cites "development" but yeah. That would be correct. (Inaudible -off the microphone) Corrie: You're not going to change anything. You just want to comment on it. Any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Robnett: Yeah, just to keep me from having to call Shari up at 8:00 in the morning and explain all this to me. So I have the option of posting a bond for the ditch. I don't feel that it's economical to hire somebody to go out there to do a study. We've got everybody from we don't want the ditch tiled at all to a 60 inch pipe; is that correct? So that I can just post a performance bond for it. Now I have spoken with the gentleman at Nampa Meridian Irrigation, Bill Henson, and what their standard requirement is for that ditch is 36 inch concrete reinforced non-jointed fabric cloth gravel packed pipe. It's not just a matter of throwing in a 36 inch pipe. They want the water to be able to infiltrate. They want it semi-purified when it comes in and everything, and I've done this very elementary. I went to the gentleman. He's very aware of the project. He knows exactly where I'm at. He's been out there, and with that information I went to MASCO, who is a reputable contractor here in town and got them to give me an estimate on doing all of the above. Concrete reinforced pipe, gravel pack, filtration, cloth and everything. Can I use that estimate based on if it's tied to lot and block and width of the lot. There was some indication that it needed to go 20 feet passed and I asked Nampa Meridian and they said no, that's not their requirement. They're not even actually requiring the ditch to be covered at this time. They did say that they would find it very cumbersome if one Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 27 guy did his, three stores down the next guy did his, and they would like to see if and when it ever got done that it be done from Eagle Road in a continuous manner until you got to another open space. And do when I post the owner of the property will post a letter of credit and is Meridian City the beneficiary of that letter or is it more specific Nampa Meridian? Bird: The City- Robnett: And the other plans and specifications the other requirements that were on there, then I submit those to Shari Stiles or the building department? Bird: Public Works Robnett: Just that you and I have gone over it and everything is pretty much okay, but there was a request in there for submitting a set of plans. Stiles: Are you talking plans for the ditch itself? Robnett: No, plans for the building to check our setbacks - Stiles: That's done, it's in place, everything else is -- Robnett: Fine, okay. Corrie: I have one question for Mr. Rountree. Your insertion that under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers the developer provide the size which would be 48 inch or greater post a significant bond. Is that just a letter from him say it would be? Is that what you are asking? Rountree: Yeah if he could provide a letter from an engineering firm or Idaho Transportation Department if they do the study and say it needs to be 60 inches. That's public record if you could supply that to the City. That would be great information. That wouldn't cost you more than a phone call. Robnett: Well I might do that - I looked I mean I've been out there for five months looking at that project, and I too just have an opinion. But it looks like if you put a 36 inch pipe with no irrigation in there, it would be half full right now today. So there's a significant amount of water going through there. Thank you. Bird: Thank you Ray. 16. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 28 Corrie: Council, I'll entertain a motion as far as the development agreement then in this case. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we (End of Tape) I move that we take item 16 the development agreement for Olson Bush Industrial Park off the agenda. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Bentley that we take item number 16 the development agreement Olson Bush Industrial Park off the agenda. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 17. ORDINANCE #812 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: Corrie: Mr. Gigray, comment. Gigray: Again Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as a safety valve I would appreciate this being maybe sponsored and maybe put on the agenda and make sure the Public Works is happy with the legal description. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have a question for Gary. Had you had an opportunity to look at the legal description on this one? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, Councilman Rountree, I think have - I think my associate has reviewed this. We've been to be pretty careful with these, and we are requiring that they be submitted by a licensed land surveyor as one of our ordinance requirements. But I can't say for certain. I will make sure that I check that so that on your second reading I will have that verified. Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that the Meridian City Council pass Ordinance #812 annexation and zoning of Olson Bush Industrial Park and for the public readings of tonight 1/19/99 and 2/2/99. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Bentley to have Ordinance #812 first reading 1/5/99. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 29 Corrie: Mr. Clerk would you read Ordinance #812 title only? Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor. (ORDINANCE #812 WAS READ TITLE ONLY) Corrie: Okay that concludes the first reading of Ordinance #812. The second reading to be January 19~h, 99. Before we start on the public hearings, I'll entertain a motion to have a ten minute recess. Bentley: So moved. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. (TEN MINUTE RECESS TAKEN) 18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GENERAL AUTO REPAIR & SERVICE BY JOHN BISS -WEST OF MERIDIAN ROAD: Corrie: I'll open the public hearing and at this time I'll have staff give a report. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council you requested that this be placed back up for a public hearing because of some of the issues that remained with the extension of Pinwood Street. The (inaudible) of the entire parcel of property that was not shown on the conditional use permit and Mr. Biss is here tonight to answer any questions you may have. Corrie: Since this is a public hearing, I invite the applicant's representative to speak. Name and address please. Biss: It's John Biss, current place of business is 1334 E. First Street, Meridian. Corrie: Okay anything you want to tell us about your request? Biss: Just answer your questions you got. Corrie: Council, questions of Biss? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Biss and Shari as well, I think one of the biggest issues we had was the landscaping and the setback or buffer strip if you will on that particular Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 30 corridor. I think we have 35 feet. That's what has been talked about with you, and you have difficulty in providing that given the lay out of the lot and - Biss: I don't really have difficulty providing it. The only real problem I have is they're not asking that of everybody on Meridian Road. They just approved a development straight across the street for only 15 feet. It's my understanding there's only two people that's asked for the 35 feet, and that's the one piece of property that I bought half of and Norm Fuller owns the other half, so that's the only piece of property they they're going to ask the 35 feet of landscaping on. I just thought it's going to look funny with 35 feet of landscaping in front of my place and the person beside me only having 15 feet and across the street only having 15 feet. Rountree: You don't have any problem providing landscaping consistent with what's adjacent to you or what may be adjacent to you? Biss: No Rountree: Okay. Biss: In fact my original findings show 20 feet because Shari said that would be fine but then you come back and say 35 is what had been requested in the annexation of the property. Rountree: We also have some information from the Public Works Department about the need of an easement in order to get hook ups for city water and sewer. Biss: The gentleman that I bought the property from still owns the property of the easement actually. There's a 50 foot easement there now for Pinwood Street that may or may not go through some day, but I've got verbal permission for the easement for the sewer. I have an easement agreement that I have access to that property, but I guess I need another easement agreement for the sewer. Rountree: A question for probably Gary or Shari, do we have documentation that identifies that easement? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council, Councilman Rountree I think there is documentation concerning the 50 foot wide ingress egress easement. It's identified I believe as an access easement. I believe that's all we have or all that's available. Rountree: And would that be sufficient for the utilities or do the utilities have to be outside of that easement? ~, , ~`~ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 31 Smith: I would have to read the easement and see what it says specifically. If it's an exclusive easement to access only, then it wouldn't be sufficient. At least I don't believe it would from a legal standpoint and Mr. Gigray could probably address that better than I, but the easement would be between Mr. Biss and the property owner, N & D, I believe. Biss: Back when they were building the road, I called both the City of Meridian Public Works and they had me call the civil engineer, and they told me I got an 8 inch water and 8 inch main being stubbed into the property. What they didn't tell me is that vyas a main line that they planned on going back through Pinwood Street so somewhere along the line somebody has got planned for an 8 inch sewer and water going through Pinwood Street. I would assume that they had plans and permission to do so. Rountree: That's all I have. .Bentley: On your diagram that's done by your architect, Rendition, they show a temporary entrance off of S. Meridian Road. Biss: Yes. Bentley: Okay and that's between two landscape - Biss: Right. Bentley: If and when Pinwood goes through, are you going to change your access to Pinwood? Biss: At the time that I sold the property to the highway district, I took what I thought was substantially less than the property was worth for a trade for a guarantee to access to my property. And then later the Ada County Highway District says they want that to be a temporary, so they granted a temporary approach upon future redevelopment of that property. Only at that point in time would they ask that approach to be changed, and that's only if Pinwood Street ever went through, and Pinwood Street is still a big if. Bentley: Okay. My question is when Pinwood goes through, are you going to close the temporary access with landscaping to match what's existing? Biss: At this point in time, I'm not planning on closing it at all. I don't have any plans to do any more development, so I don't - my agreement with the highway district anyway is that I won't have to worry about that unless I plan to do further development on my property. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 32 Bentley: But the one thing I'd like to see is if that development occurs and your entrance changes, that this temporary be closed in with landscaping to match what's there. Biss: If in deed the temporary driveway has to be closed, yeah, we'd have to do something with it. Bentley: Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay, thank you. Anyone else for this development request for conditional use permit to speak tonight? Anybody against the conditional use permit? Okay, hearing nobody else asking for public hearing request I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item number 18. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we close the public hearing for item 18, John Biss's conditional use permit. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to close the public hearing on item 18 request for conditional use permit by Mr. John Biss. Council you have before you make a motion to either accept, deny or change the - I'm sorry. All those in favor of the motion close the hearing say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Discussion? I guess we need a discussion before we make a motion. Rountree: I have none. Mr. Mayor I would move that we direct the city attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions and Order of decision on the request for conditional use permit by Mr. John Biss, and that the Findings of Fact reflect a favorable action on the part of the city for the conditional use permit and that the permit be conditioned with concerns addressed by the City Planning and Zoning Director, Stiles, as it relates to landscaping,along Meridian Road and the points of access as discussed by Councilman Bentley. Bentley: Second. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 33 Cowie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley on the motion to have the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as stated in the motion. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 19. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.84 ACRES BY PAULA. HOFFMAN (MERIDIAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH) - SOUTWWEST CORNER OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND USTICK: Cowie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite any staff reports. (Inaudible) Gigray: I have submitted to you Mr. Mayor and members of the Council a memo regarding this particular agenda item. My review of this file in preparation for this meeting, I have some concern regarding the action the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended a designation of L-O, limited office district, and I believe the application was submitted for a low density residential district, which is R-4. That would be a material change in the notice that would have been provided for the public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission, which the requirements of Idaho Code are that you have to renotice the public hearing, and I believe the process should also include that there were going to be hearing and a recommendation of limited office district that the applicant should make an amendment to their application for that district. I recommend in this memo a procedure as you will see under recommendations for the Mayor and Council to follow in this matter to ensure number one that I have interpreted the record appropriately which I believe that Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning, as well as the City Clerk could answer those questions, and then you may want to determine if the applicant has a representative here, what their position about amending their application, and then I recommend that you remand it back to Planning and Zoning. That the applicant amend their application, that there would be a staff report on the amended application which of course one of the analyses that we have to have is whether or not the application and the zoning designation is in conformance with the comp plan, and also that notice is given to the neighboring property owners as well as to the published notice of the zoning designation that would be recommended and sought, and I must disclose for the record that I'm a Presbyterian and a member of Boon Memorial Presbyterian Church. I make this recommendation (inaudible). Cowie: City Clerk, Planning and Zoning are these facts stated correct? What we have in this file I guess that it was advertised L-O and people had the neighboring property owners was R-4? Is that correct? Stiles: It was advertised as R-4. Bird: This being ran through as an L-O now? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 34 Cowie: (Inaudible) Berg: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, the application did have R-4. My understanding is with confrontation with the Planning and Zoning Director during public hearing processes that they thought an L-O zoning would be more appropriate, but the application does have an R-4 zoning. If I'm not mistaken, I thought that was the conversation at the hearings. Cowie: All right. Is the applicant here? I guess - Hoffman: Paul Hoffman, 3235 N. Mountain View Drive, Boise, 83704. Mayor and Councilmen, I want to ask Shari when I made the application I believe that you pointed out in the hearing that the zoning I indicated on there didn't exist for.Meridian, because on the application I took a zoning classification from Ada County at which point then the discussion because okay, what is the appropriate zoning application for this location, and at that time it was brought to my attention that the parcel across the street, which is the new park was an L-O zone and also in the zoning book a church is a permitted use in an L-O zone and for those two reasons we said okay well let's make it an L-O zone, and that's where that went. Was that accurate? Stiles: The request was made for an R-4 zone, however, churches are not permitted in that zone. But we did discuss was it an L-O would permit a church. However I think that we probably need to look at a split zoning for because I don't think it's appropriate that we would zone that corner L-O because it's not intended for an office development and that's not the use that you are proposing. You are proposing a residential development so we may be looking at a split zoning that you need to apply for. Hoffman: Thank you. Did you folks understand that the corner lot is like one plus acres, so anyway that particular issue, that's my understanding. However the Council recommends we proceed, I believe I would be open to that. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I just want to augment my advice here, and I think this is the first time since I've been here this type of issue has come up and just not only for this situation, but for future direction the Planning and Zoning and for the City Council, I always think it's best that the applicant, that the Planning and Zoning Commission make their rulings on the applicant's application. Either they recommend that it be or not recommend. You can receive this as a recommendation of denial of their application of R-4 and then proceed with the public hearing on that basis. The reason for my instruction here was so that the applicant understood that the better application or that they ought to amend their application when you remand it back then they can take appropriate action to amend it so when Planning and Zoning takes it up again, it's under a new application, and what has happened in this instance is I believe Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 35 this has caused some confusion which is understandable. No one has intended anything by that is that you get notices that go out to one that says it's a public hearing for an application for limited office and another one goes out saying that it's for an R-4 and anytime there's a material change in an application you have to renotice everything to whatever that change is. Hoffman: Are you speaking to the notice that's posted on the building? Gigray: There's a number of notices. There's a notice on the building. There's a notice to affected property owners within 300 feet, and there's also a notice that's published in the paper, and as I understand the record in this instance that we have notices that were sent in the mail that may not have been the same as were published in the paper, and in any event for this Council to consider an application for an L-O zone, unless the notice went out that way, we would have a problem, and the developer does not want to have an application process with a procedural problem because then it's subject to challenge and that doesn't do anybody any good. Corrie: So if I'm reading this correctly we should cancel this public hearing recommend it back to the Planning and Zoning for the specific recommendations then that you mentioned here. Gigray: Right and I'd also recommend it as you've already done is have the applicant at least be able to address the Council knowing what the advice that you've received is: They may decide no we don't want to do this. We want the public hearing (Inaudible) position is. Bird: Mr. Mayor I got a question for Mr. Gigray. Is he wants -they're talking about an R-4 and an L-O zone there. His new application should show that, shouldn't it? Gigray: Absolutely. Bird: So if you're coming back and wants (inaudible) if you're going to do some residential developing in there and not limited office, then you've got to file as both zonings on the property. Hoffman: I think Shari's recommendation is based on the fact that we have residential on the corner. Not so much that we're going to develop residential, but that it's already there and that's fine. I don't believe there would an objection to that. I guess what's going through my mind now it's not so much this issue but we were before Planning and Zoning twice and now to go back and revisit this whole issue again. There were a whole number of other issues that need to be addressed before you, and I'm wondering okay procedurally are we just talking about that particular issue or am I having to revisit Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 36 the whole thing with Planning and Zoning again. You know there are other conditions that the Planning and Zoning Department recommended that we - Bird: Start over and make new so you will have the whole ball of wax again. Gigray: I mean that can be part of the record. It's not like you start with new information. Sorry Mr. Mayor. I believe that the new application and staffing is going to of course build on what's already there. It's not like you're really starting all over again, but the problem we have and my advice to the City Council and to the Mayor is that we have a state statute that very specific about notice and we have state supreme court decisions that say if notice isn't filed in accordance with that statute, it's a due process issue and if anybody challenges it, they go to court and you can pass an ordinance and you'll get the ordinance vacated and you'll be back where you started all over again, so we know there's a procedural problem at this point. So the best thing to do is send it back so that that can be corrected. Whether or not the church wishes to amend its application or says no, we want R-4 or nothing. They can take that position, but whether anyway you look at it, we got a notice problem at this point. The only way to fix it is to send it back. Hoffman: One other related issue. It's my understanding now this was a couple of years ago that I looked at the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. That intersection is slated for strictly residential. So it was somewhat a surprise to me if it's accurate to learn that the park was zoned L-O because I know there wasn't any to my knowledge the church owners didn't receive any notice about the change to the comprehensive plan, so I guess what I'm asking is how did that happen you know because if you look at it that property isn't slated to be L-O. It's just residential. Now if we go in and ask for an L-O and somebody looks at the comprehensive plan, and say well L-O is not part of the comprehensive plan. Now we're going to be asked to apply for that particular procedure of changing the master plan. Can somebody speak to that what's going on there? Corrie: Okay Mr. Gigray go ahead and then Mr. Bentley. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, Mr. Hoffman, whatever action has been taken with regards to any previous matters, I don't have any personal knowledge with regards to that. I would say if there were procedural issues affecting that particular action, if the time period has run since that action has taken, then it would be moot at this point. It doesn't make any difference. What in your situation I think your best advice is to talk to your people who were advising you about the development of this particular site, review the ordinances of this city and the comp plan and make your best judgment about what the most appropriate application is based on your intended use of that property. We could not - I would not and I have instructed staff to give information about the application of our ordinances of what is permitted and what is not permitted, but the actual decision where maybe you could go this way or you could go that way Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 37 always has to be up to the applicant as to what is in their best interest. At this point what you're dealing with from my perspective and my advice to the City Council is a procedural problem. That is an application was made for an R-4. That was heard and then there was a recommendation to the City Council that it be not zoned R-4 but it be zoned L-O. So then that's a material change from the application and if the commission is seeking to make a recommendation to change that application to something else, then it ought to be renoticed to have a hearing because if the law didn't provide for that, it would be like you'd come in and say I want R-4 and the commission and the City Council will change it light industrial. I'd get a notice that it's going to be R-4 and I'm not opposed to that. I live next door, don't go to the hearings, and I don't care, and the next thing I know I've got a light industrial zone next to me and I'm going to scream bloody murder, so that's why that law is set up that way so if there are material changes the neighboring property owners, the person who the law recognizes have an interest and entitled to notice have an opportunity to address that specific question and what happened here is we ended up with a material change and then we have a notice that goes out part of it is in accordance with the original application. Part is with the recommendation of Planning and Zoning Commission and so we have a problem there too. The only way to correct it and because our law says the commission and the governing body, which is the City Council have to if there's a material change renotice it and my legal opinion and advice to this Council and Mayor we have no choice then to send it back. Corrie: Shari did you have a comment? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council the only comment I had was regarding the park site. If you would like me to go into that, I will. Bentley: In light of the discussions we've had with the Counselor, I'd move we cancel this public hearing and remand this application for annexation and zoning by Paul ,Hoffman for Meridian Presbyterian Church back to P & Z so they can clean up the zoning issue. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to cancel the public hearing and remand this matter back to the Planning and Zoning Commission with specific recommendations. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Counselor since the motion was to cancel the public hearing, do we need to have a motion on it or was that it right there? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 38 Gigray: Well I believe the motion that was in order would be to remand it back. I'll just prepare an order for your signature in light of that. (Inaudible) Bird: He closed it with the motion didn't he? Corrie: All right. Thank you. 20. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 4.296 ACRES FOR PROPOSED SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC -SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and staff report. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council this is the remainder of what used to be known as the Scottsdale Subdivision which was an R-15 zone. Currently there exists there the castle known as Dreamland Child Care Center and the remainder of the property they are proposing to develop as an L-O Subdivision. Staff has no outstanding issues. We've received response from the applicant on our concerns and we are confident they will comply with our conditions as recommended. Corrie: Anyone else have comments? Okay this is a public hearing. I invite the representative of the Scottsdale Subdivision. Elg: Van Elg, Briggs Engineering, 1800 W. Overland Road, Boise, Idaho. Do I need to be sworn? Oh, you're not doing that anymore? (Inaudible) Elg: Representing the developers of this Scottsdale Subdivision which includes a rezone and a preliminary plat application. The property is located you may be more familiar with the Dreamland Daycare Facility. Some people refer to it as the castle out there on Franklin Road. It's located in that general area. The daycare facility is located here, and Will this is the same board that we presented at P & Z so you have all of this documentation in your record. We've requested a rezone. The property is currently zoned R-15, which is a high density residential zone. That's for higher density residential development, multi family dwellings and so forth. To the east we have some four-plex units. I believe this property is zoned R-8 and to the south and the west, we have a zoning of R-4. To the north we have C-G and I-L so this is kind of an anomaly in the area right here with this R-15 zoning, which allows for such high density residential. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 39 In talking with the client, we suggested that he request a rezone to L-O for a couple of reasons. The first being that if we were to come in with an R-15 zone request right here and multi family, we felt that we probably would meet with some very significant opposition of any surrounding owners especially these folks here in the Finnway Park and Crestwood Subdivisions to the south and west. We were surprised to find out that even the people in the four-plex units were quite concerned about any density even four-plex development occurring in this area, some of the comments we received. With that in mind we looked at the L-O and that serves very well as a transition zone by definition in the Meridian City Ordinance between such uses and the client agreed to that suggestion. We then requested that we hold a neighborhood meeting although it's not required by the City of Meridian. We felt it would be advantageous to get polls of the folks out there in that area. We did that and we sent to about 70-80 letters to surrounding property owners. I think that information is submitted in your packets also. Of those 70-80 letters that we sent out and invited to the neighborhood meeting, one person attended, lived here in Crestwood, and we have a comment from him and a statement from him that says he has no opposition to the project as shown in the preliminary plat. We received a number of phone calls from folks with varied requests. Some wanting pathways and interconnections here so that they could access a daycare. We can get into some of that in the preliminary plat discussion, but the primary concern was that they even the four plex units which are two story, they were concerned that they would be looking down on an unsightly development. So I tried to reassure them that the type of development that will be constructed will be very pleasing and pleasant, and the client went out and took pictures of developments that he believes this site looks very similar to these types of professional buildings and I might point out that that's what they intend to do is professional office type complexes. Dental offices, doctors offices, attorney's offices, no. (Inaudible) Elg: Anyway, they'll be pleasant and attractive. If you're familiar with the Ustick Road between Cole and Maple Grove, there's a number of dental offices and things. That's where most of these were taken from, and that's what he intends to model his project after also. There's a chance that he may build one or two of the buildings as a marketing - to market the project first and get the thing off the ground and get it started. I don't know where he's at on that. But that was initial discussions was what he was pondering. With that I guess I can close my comments on the rezone. If you have any comments of me, I'd be glad to address them. Corrie: Council any questions? Bird: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 40 Rountree: I have none. Corrie: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else from the public who would like issue testimony in this hearing? Hearing none, I will request a motion to close the public hearing. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion we close the public hearing. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Rountree to close the public hearing on the rezone for the Scottsdale Subdivision. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Discussion, motion? Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that the Meridian City Council approves the rezoning as requested by Wolfe Commercial Enterprises on 4.296 acres for proposed Scottsdale Subdivision. Corrie: And do you want to propose that the attorney draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law? Bird: And the attorney to draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Anderson to approve the request for rezone of the Wolfe Commercial Enterprise and to direct the attorney to draw up the approval of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 21. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC - SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: Corrie: I'll open the public hearing and staff reports, Shari on this one. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 41 Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council staff has no problems with this subdivision provided they comply with our recommendations of our memo December 4t", 1998. Corrie: Any further staff comments? Then I will invite the representative from the Scottsdale Subdivision to testify. Elg: Thank you. I guess I'd incorporate my comments of the rezone into this one. Sorry, Van Elg, Briggs Engineering, 1800 W. Overland Road, and yes. I'd incorporate my comments from the rezone into this application also at this time, and then add some regarding the preliminary plat. In the original application we had not included some things that the City requested during a Planning and Zoning Commission. Since that time we've modified this plan and resubmitted it, and I believe Shari that you have a copy of that now. Did you get the revised one? I believe we sent ten copies. It's dated 12/16/98. Stiles: 17? Elg: Right about the surveyor's signature there, there should be a 12/16. Bird: 12/16198. Elg: Okay in that we addressed the comments that the Planning and Zoning Commission had, and they did have some changes to those staff comment letter that Shari just referred to. In general we agreed' with all of the comments of staff. We did agree to go ahead amend it. We had suggested originally that the sewer line and the (inaudible) that would be provided through this area here be allowed to be placed under an easement rather than a separate lot. But Bruce prevailed on us and we agreed to take that as a separate lot. (Inaudible) came up with a good suggestion. I don't know why we didn't think of it first, but he suggested that we take the drainage out of this lot here and place it underneath the sidewalk which we agreed to do and that seems to work fine for us. So you'll see that this is now lot drainage is located here. We've also included setbacks that Shari request. 25 foot along Franklin Road I think it was Shari. We've also shown the irrigation easements that were requested by the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District along the front. As you can see that's going to kind of chip away at some of that building size up on that north end of the project, but that's okay. We can deal with that. Keep in mind that any of the buildings that you see here are purely conceptual. We were just drawing them in to see how we could fit it in. If we could make it work with the lots. The developer may come in with something completely different. We tried to show parking and how we could fit if those lots were reasonable in size to accommodate a reasonable building and still provide one parking space per 400 square feet of office area. We batted around a number of design issues on this. We considered larger lots. But then realized if we did that, that the developer could come in and place two story units here and that that may cause some difficulty. It's highly Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 42 unlikely even if we had the larger lots the developer would put the two story units in this area. I just don't think it's very economical for them. The nature of these types of professional buildings is typically single story, but in any event we batted that around some and decided if we went with the smaller lots, we would significantly reduce the capabilities of any of these buildings going up high and we would limit them to single story and still be able to provide adequate parking. There may be some cross access easements and things, which I think ACHD will be happy with anyway with respect to parking and access to parking lots, and the lot owners can deal with those issues. The other thing that we discussed in the Planning and Zoning Commission was staff comments regarding the landscape buffering. This was an issue for some of the people that called. As I said primarily those (End of Tape) Elg: ... wanted to know how we were going to protect them from the unsightly development. I don't think that's the concern, but the - we told them we would provide buffering, and in fact the developer after we discussed it agreed that buffering would be -building buffering into the project right now would be a marketing tool for the resale of the individual lots. So they agreed to provide buffering as part of the platting process. The only thing that we didn't like was a 20 foot requirement and that we construct it immediately. The reason being is that if we construct a 20 foot landscape buffer right now and you can see that this building is pushed right -which is basically the setback and this building is pushed right up against that. When they come in to build that building, they are going to wipe out a good share of that landscaping in trying to just construct the building. So what we suggested is that the developer will construct ten feet as shown on the preliminary plat landscaping and basically what that boils down to and (inaudible) suffice Shari in lieu of submitting any other landscape plans, the developer will construct basically one tree per every lot that fronts on their property boundary in this location here and then various bushes and grass along that boundary along with a fence also. That should provide ample buffering given the nature of the buildings and a significant number of trees along that boundary, and we hope that would suffice for the landscaping plan. In essence some of the lots will have two or three trees, maybe four trees and some will have one or two that they will have to install when they develop. I'm sorry the developer will have to install prior to platting, then the individual lot owners can come in and as stated here, they'll be able to redesign or add to the landscaping as necessary back there. The reason for this is that they may have patios and things that they want to include back there that could go into the buffering area, but if we try to design that now, we preclude them. So allowing them to come in with their own plans and landscaping seems to make good sense for construction and provide them for adequate flexibility. I guess with that I'll close my comments on the preliminary plat for Scottsdale and open myself up for any questions. Corrie: Questions from Council? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 43 Rountree: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Corrie: Questions from staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, the only comment I would have is I would like to see a landscape plan approved prior to signature on the final plat. I'm not sure that in some instances that two trees in a hundred foot section would be considered adequate buffering. And in regard to the remark about the statement about the patios back there, there is a 20 foot setback there that they would not be able to have any covered patios or they could have maybe a concrete slab or something like that, but they understand no structures would be put in. Elg: Yeah, we just want to make sure that they didn't preclude concrete slabs and so forth. Stiles: I would just like the two inch caliper tree per each adjacent residential lot to be taken off there and that the landscape plan that you'd submit to us prior to signature on the final plat. Elg: Okay. Mr. Mayor and Shari, I guess you're referring to the comment under the typical landscape buffer detail? Stiles: Yes. Elg: Would you have another suggestion for the number of trees perhaps - (Inaudible) Stiles: I guess I would just like to see something fairly consistent along there, regular intervals of trees and then maybe you know when you're talking about maybe only having two trees back there and we do have a three inch caliper requirement. Elg: Put a buffer between units? Stiles: Well based on square footage of your asphalt, you know your overall landscape plan. Either that or have something in your covenants that's going to require something more significant than maybe two trees back there. Elg: Well I guess Mr. Mayor and Shari, I guess what I'm getting at is that there's still an additional ten feet of landscaping that will be covered by the individual lot owners, which Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 44 provides them with flexibility. So the trees we're planting isn't going to be all that you are going to see as far as landscaping. There still will be additional landscaping that other ten feet. Anderson: (Inaudible) Elg: They have to review them through Shari, so if Shari says that they have to be trees, they will Bird: Mr. Mayor, Shari, on the introduction the recommendation to the City Council Planning and Zoning, on page five, 1.5, are you disagreeing with that? What he says is basically wrote up right there. Are we disagreeing now with that concept? Stiles: I'm sorry Mr. Bird, what are you referring to? Bird: Page five Shari, 1.5. Developer to install a ten foot wide planting strip at (Inaudible) an added ten feet, which is what he was talking about trees to be down the entire -could be required prior to obtaining building permits or at time each individual lot is developed. I have to agree with the engineer. If you're going to make him put in 20 footer on some of those places, he's not going to be able to get around to build the buildings. What we want to see is the finished product after everything is finished, and that's when the landscaping and stuff can come in. Each lot is going to have different landscaping by the way the building and stuff is put up. I don't know Shari, is this 1.15 good enough for you? Stiles: Councilman Bird, Mayor and Council, this was our initial comment that we made and after we made that comment Van had come up with the scenario of going ahead and doing the ten feet and then having the developer do the additional ten feet. I have no problem with that. I would still like to see the landscape plan, which is typical that we require a landscape plan that we can approve prior to signature on the final plat so that they can also bond for those improvements prior to signature on the plat. Bird: I have no problem with that afterwards, but you're in agreement with what this is saying. I mean I have no problem with the requiring the landscaping plans, site plans, but that don't specifically say that in this. Until they start obtaining building permits. Stiles: For the additional ten feet. Bird: Yeah, that's right. Stiles: That's fine. All I'm asking is that you bring something in for that ten feet that the developer is required to - Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 45 Elg: For the first ten feet? Okay. Bird: Each building is going to sit different and be landscaped different. I mean they're not going to want ten lookalikes I don't believe out there. Corrie: Any other questions? Okay thank you. Elg: Thank you. Anyone else from the public who would like to issue testimony on this request for preliminary plat? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to close the public hearing on request for preliminary plat for Scottsdale Subdivision. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Any discussions? I'll entertain a motion on the request for preliminary plat. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the preliminary plat for Scottsdale Subdivision subject to staff comments and landscape review. Corrie: Do you want to include the attorney to prepare the ordinance? Bentley: Yes, and have the attorney prepare the ordinance and Order of Decision. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. (inaudible) -motion stated. Any further discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor would we move forward with this without having approved the rezone? Gigray: This is preliminary plat. Rountree: Still can't plat it without the proper zoning. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 46 Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, the final action we have (inaudible) decision the City of Boise is pretty well - Rountree: I didn't want to hear this Bill. Gigray: The final action would be on the final plat. Rountree: Okay. Gigray: And this is the preliminary. Cowie: Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 22. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MAWS SUBDIVISION NO. 3 BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING -NORTH OF PINE & WEST OF LOCUST GROVE: Cowie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite staff comments. Shari? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this was an application that was previously submitted as townhouses. However there were some restrictions in the annexation of the property that did not allow attached dwellings. We have made some comments on this application. The plat has not been revised to reflect all the changes required, however, if they comply with the comments as written, I don't see any real issues with this proposal. Cowie: Mr. Smith. Smith: Mr. Mayor, City Council members, I guess the only question that the Public Works still had was what the status was of the pressurized irrigation requirement. That's all I have. Thank you. Cowie: Okay, since we are in a public hearing, I'll invite the representative from the Maws Subdivision. Pavelek: My name is Richard Pavelek. I have offices at 915 W. Jefferson, Tealey's Land Surveying. This development did have a previous life and it was contorted and we did have some surprises in terms of the issue of attached versus detached and the developer still has need of going ahead and he had basically reconfigured the proposal to fit all the ordinance requirements for sizes of the lots, and these will be conventional size lots. At this time we believe that we can meet all the conditions of the approval that Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 47 were recommended to you by Planning and Zoning Commission. In response to the City Engineer, I thought we had dealt with the irrigation issue previously. We had dug through the Treasurer's receipts and at the time that the property was brought in phases one and two were in fact applied for. The water rights were vacated for the property. Now we can go back through and verify that with the previous records, but my recollection is that in the documents that we had received from the city's treasury office, we had shown that those rights had been vacated. I believe in 1993 and we had provided staff with those reports. If there's something that we've missed, we'll be happy to go back through and deal with that, but my understanding is that monies are paid in to the city for well development rights for the property and the rights to irrigation were removed from the property. So that's my understanding of the situation and between now and the final plat I guess we'll go through this again to make sure that this in fact has been covered. Maybe I should explain. At the time the subdivision was developed the developer had the option by ordinance to either pay a well development fee to the city or to provide pressurized irrigation. At that time the developer chose to exert his right and vacate his irrigation rights. So I believe the current ordinance has been modified since that time. Bird: Gary, is that previous ordinance, do you know anything about this because there is a stipulation in here 1.20 regarding pressurized irrigation. Now whether we approve, disapprove, whatever this 1.20 has got to be taken care of. Smith: The option existed. I don't believe the ordinance has been changed in that regard. The option existed for the Council to require pressurized irrigation or allow the developer to pay the in lieu of pressurized irrigation well development fee. I can't tell you if that happened on this total parcel of ground or not. The property still has water rights. They can be recovered. They petitioned out of the easement, but the water rights still exist and they can be recovered by payment of a fee for the lot sizes. That isn't an impossibility at all. I don't remember when the Council started requiring the pressurized irrigation in lieu of the well development fee, but that has been a policy decision that the Council has made for the past several years to get us out of the domestic water sprinkling of irrigated areas. In terms of whether or not that fee was paid for this entire parcel of ground, we would have to check the records through the treasurer's office. Corrie: That was back iri '91 or'92 when I was on the Council. Bird: Mr. Mayor was that a policy to come in even they were not developing the whole thing but to purchase the buy out at that time for the whole thing? I can't believe that the developer would put his money up front for property that he don't plan on developing. ~~ Meridian City Council January 5,1999 Page 48 Smith: That's what I was going to add Councilman and Mayor that typically the developers paid the well development fee for that portion that they were final platting. Bird: I have to agree with that. Smith: That was a condition for signature by myself and City Clerk for the Mayor and City Council. Pavelek: Mr. Mayor I think this is an issue that can be determined. We simply came across a series of receipts, and it would have appeared that it had been paid, but if it hasn't I guess we'll have to deal with that. But at this point in time it's my understanding that they have been paid, but as I say it can remain a condition until the final plat, and we'll deal with it at that time. Bird: The only problem as I read this article and if I'm looking at it thinking right and I could be way off base, but we have to give you a variance from the requirement of not having pressurized irrigation at this time to pass this if I'm reading this right. Pavelek: I don't think so. Gigray: I would - Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, Councilman Bird, as I understand this requirement, it would be a condition of approval of the preliminary plat so this would be a matter of conditions that the applicant would have to meet before final plat was submitted for your approval. And at that point you would probably if they can establish legally that they are not required by reason of some grandfathering to be exempted from this requirement, then I think that would probably come through with a staff report that that information has been supplied. If they can't establish that and they do have to request a variance then they'll make an application for the variance, and that would be processed probably before the final plat. Bird: Let me ask you a dumb question then. This is a preliminary plat, and this is conditions that was passed upon. It don't say anything about the final plat. So you're telling me that we don't have to worry about this in the preliminary plat, that it will be taken care of in the final plat? Why would that be in there then? Gigray: Well what I'm saying is that condition would have to be -there would have to be proof of compliance with that condition and that proof would have to be established by the applicant that they are not required to meet that condition by reason of a legal cause that they would have by the payment of this fee if that were established, or they would have to comply with this condition which is obtain a variance from the city before final plat is approved. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 49 Bird: Mr. Mayor as I understand now and you guys can tell me if I'm off base, but as I understand now we are requiring pressurized systems. Okay. For this preliminary plat all other preliminary plats are based on pressurized systems. Am I not right? And it don't have nothing to do with the final plat. It's the preliminary plat that states it. I just don't understand why this thing is in here stating that we have to make a variance to pass the preliminary plat. It's in the preliminary plat. There's nothing about the final plat. I'm just trying to clear it up for myself. I'm in a daze I guess on this thing. Rountree: Mr. Mayor if I could. I think what it's saying is that in order to approve the way it is requested, we would have to pass a variance. We don't have to approve it the way it was requested. We can approve it that it would meet all the ordinances of the City of Meridian, and they will provide a pressurized irrigation system. Unless they can demonstrate a hardship, then they can submit a request for a variance to the city, which is probably a better way to handle it as opposed to having a condition saying you must approve a variance in order for the pressurized irrigation not to be proposed for this development. Bird: That's what I'm saying Charlie and you said that could pass this variance at final plat, but what you just got through saying makes sense to me. I'm just being dense. Rountree: It's 10:30 (Inaudible) Bird: I just can't figure out why we got it in there if we don't need it. Corrie: Any other questions? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Is there anyone else here from the public who would like to issue testimony in this? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to close the public hearing. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. l~ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 50 Corrie: Comments, decisions and motions. Are you ready for the motion, have at it. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the preliminary plat for Maws Subdivision No. 3 by Tealey's Land Survey subject to staff conditions and the resolve of the irrigation issue. Bird: Second. Bentley: And have the attorney prepare the Findings of Facts and Order -prepare the proper Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to approve the preliminary plat with conditions and have the attorney prepare the proper order. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 23. REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY TODD MASON D/B/A MOXIE JAVA - 106 E. WILLIAMS: Corrie: Staff. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is a request for outdoor seating at the Moxie Java on Williams and East First Street. The initial site plan that was submitted showed the seating would be on the lawn area adjacent to East First Street. However that was not what the applicant intended. Their intent was to have a couple of table on the north side of the building there adjacent to where the entrance is, and the staff would support that with the condition that a minimum five foot clear walkway be provided at all times. Corrie: Any other staff reports? Any questions from Council? Anderson: I have a question. I guess it's been a while since I looked at this drawing, but I'm somewhat familiar with that building and it almost seems to me like there could be a safety issue there putting seating out there. It seems like there's drive up windows on both sides of the building as well as there's parking out along the far north end of the property so you have cars backing up. You'll have cars turning from one of the drive up windows rounding this. What's going to be out there to protect somebody out there sitting from getting run over? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 51 1~ Stiles: They're not proposing anything. That's a good point. There probably should be some kind of ballards or something to protect the area, but the applicant can maybe speak to provisions they may make for that. Donman: Jennifer Donman, 2407 Snyder. I wasn't aware that that would be a problem. I don't see why there would be any reason why we couldn't put anything up. Do you have any suggestions? Stiles: Possibly some of the ballards like they have that you put around gas meters or something like that. I don't know if that would be adequate. But at least probably at a couple of strategic points for each side there is probably appropriate. Anderson: I guess I was thinking something a little more attractive like some type of decorative landscaping plan or a big concrete thing or something like that. But it just seems like there would be an awful hazard there to me. Corrie: Do you want staff to get together with them and see what they can do as part of the conditional use. Bird: Mr. Mayor what you're asking us is the staff want to continue the public hearing until the 19~"~ Corrie: It's not a public hearing. It's just a request for conditional use permit. Bird: Yeah, but it's a public hearing. Corrie: No, it isn't. Bird: Okay. Anderson: I guess it's their liability if someone gets run over, but I guess my opinion maybe staff ought to make some recommendations for some possible solutions or something like that. Corrie: They can do that in your motion for conditional use permit. Any further comments? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: None. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 52 Cowie: Okay, I'll entertain a motion on the conditional use permit. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the conditional use permit for outside seating for Moxie Java with the suggestion that they get the staff and come up maybe some sort of safety things to protect themselves in the parking area. Cowie: With Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision? Bentley: Yes and instruct the attorney to provide the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision. Bird: Second. Cowie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to approve the conditional use permit with the staff giving them recommendations for outside seating and also for the attorney to draw up Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision. Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion, say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Cowie: So if you will just kind of get with Shari. 24. WATER /SEWER /TRASH DELINQUENCIES: Cowie: (DELINQUENCY READ BY MAYOR) Is there anyone present who wishes to contest their water, sewer and trash delinquency? All right you are hereby informed that you may appeal to have the decision of the city reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off in the amount of the turn off list is $52,046.49. I'll entertain a motion to approve the delinquency turn off list. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the delinquency water turn off list and direct the Mayor to commend staff for the new format that the list has been presented to the Council. It's now readable and we can understand it. Anderson: Second. Cowie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson to approve the delinquency turn off list. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 53 25. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. KENNY BOWERS: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION FOR ARCHITECT SELECTION FOR NEW FIRE STATION: Bowers: This will be short Bentley, about an hour or so. Mayor Corrie and Council I'd like to just take a few minutes to give you a little bit of history on our committee that we've put together for this building. We have met for the last four or five months a couple of times each month and on this committee we have full time firefighters, volunteer firefighters. We have city council personnel, we have rural commissioners, and we have P & Z member. Nick Corral has done most of our drawing for us. We went through the building, the plans of what we think the building should look like, and to make it a (inaudible) for out in this area. I'd like to also at this time recognize we do have two rural commissioners out in the audience. Mike Ingram and Steve Bravo clear in the back. On this committee, we had Nick Corral, Brian Zimmerman, Ed Pierce, John Thompson, Malcolm MacCoy, Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Mike Ingram, and Steve Bravo plus myself so we had quite an array of people on the committee. As we got into this about halfway through we found out that there's a state law that we cannot ask for bids for our architectural firms, so we just had to ask if they would send us packets to show us the jobs sites that they have done before and the work that they would be able to do for us. We advertised twice in the Valley News Times. We received all the packets on December 9~h. We sent ten out in the mail. Two packets were picked up here at City Hall. But we only received seven packets back. December 16~" we met the committee, went through all the packets to see if any of them was in favor of working on our building, giving us some ideas. At that time we had three architectural firms that we thought would do us a good job and had built fire stations or proposed and worked on fire stations before. We were ZGA, Arrowrock, and Olsons and Associates. December 215, we had all three companies come in and give us a presentation, show us pictures of some of the buildings they had done, give us some ideas of what we can do with the property out there since we're in the hole kind of having to come up to Franklin Road. We listen each one had about an hour with questions and answers afterwards. After they gave their presentations, the committee met and we would like to recommend that ZGA and ourselves try to work out an agreement on a contract of what they would charge us to be the lead firm architectural firm for the fire station, and I guess this is the first time I've done this so I don't know quite what our next step is, but I guess there are quite three or four different ways of doing contracts. They'll go hourly or they will go per bid or they will do different things. So at this time we would like to ask the City Council if they have any questions or any help that we can have to help us out on this. Anderson: So you did not have ZGA prepare a resolution for tonight? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 54 Bowers: No, I did not. I was under the impression that we had to get City Council's approval first before ZGA could come in and give us a proposal. Anderson: I guess that was my understanding is that's how the City Council gives approval is by passing a resolution and they would have you draft that. Bowers: Paul from ZGA was not under that impression either. He said he wanted to get an approval from City Council, and that's what Mayor Corrie had told me also. Bird: I was under the impression they were going to do the same thing that they had done on the city hall thing that Paul was going to draft up a resolution and bring it forward for us to accept. Now we're kicking ourselves down two more weeks. Corrie: Mr. Gigray do you got any comment on this? This would have to go through our legal staff as well a resolution. Gigray: Well I think given where you are at this point given the presentation you could accept the report of the Chief and you could tell him to proceed with ZGA to come with the necessary documents and I hear from Councilman Bird that you want to go in the same direction that you are going with city hall and bring it back to the next meeting for approval. Bird: I know we can't go on the same -all we have to come is standard AIA, contract form between architect and owner, which is the city. It's a standard AIA contract. Now all we have to decide is whether we want to pay them a flat fee, an hourly fee, or a percentage of a bid fee. Most jobs are done on a bid fee completely through. That was my understanding from the meeting we come out of. I don't know if that was Ron's, but however the Council would like to -which way do you want to pay them? Do you want to pay them by the hour or do you want pay them by the job or do you want to pay them by the bid fee, the percent of bid fee? Isn't that the way you got it Ron? Anderson: Yeah. Bird: Was basically what we had to select there? Anderson: Yeah. Bird: Standard AIA owner architect deal there. That's city, school district, everybody uses that form. Anderson: Well I would make a motion that we enter into a contract with ZGA Architects for the architectural drawings for the new fire station and do that on a percent basis of the project. (~ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 55 Bird: I'll second that. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Bird that we contract with ZGA contract on a percent of the project. Any further discussion? Anderson: I guess my understanding of the percent is that we have the option of going to ZGA and negotiating what that percentage will be and my understanding is that a standard is somewhere around 7 or 8% on these types of projects so possibly the committee or a couple of representatives from the committee could actually do that negotiation process with them and determine what that percentage is going to be prior to us entering into that contract. Bird: I think you're right, Ron. I also understand and in fact all three firms said that that was certainly negotiable, and depending on what size, how much -Nick has done so much preliminary work, that's going to help tremendously cost wise so I think we need to go in and just negotiate with them. Corrie: (Inaudible) Anderson: Probably we'll get together as a committee and select a couple of representatives. Corrie: You two and the two Councilmen would be a good committee to do the negotiations on that . Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: My suggestion would be that Keith and Ron and the other two sitting out there could go and negotiate with them. Bird: That's fine with me. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, just from the Council and from the City extend appreciation to those members that are here and those members who are not here for the work they did and the hours they spent in coming up to this recommendation. I appreciate it and think you made a very good recommendation, and I think we've got a good choice and finally we're getting somewhere. Bowers: I will pass that along to the committee and I'll get a hold of Paul first thing in the morning. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 56 Anderson: Just a comment for the other City Councilmen and the Mayor. There are some drawings out that if you haven't seen yet maybe Kenny could bring those and show them at the next Council meeting or something that Nick worked on and that probably will be the basic concept that we go off of. There maybe some slight changes from ZGA, but pretty much how the station would look from a conceptual standpoint. (Inaudible) Come: Thank you Kenny. Bentley: Before the commissioners leave and while we're on the subject of fire stations, I would like to see us pursue put some plans together for the Ten Mile station and maybe getting the two entities together and discussing where we could be time wise for putting together the building of the substation out there too. So sometime down the line we can schedule a meeting together and go over this. I think it's time we crank ahead. You'll have a feeling of where you are financially and we can see what we can get done with that. Because we got the same situation. Nick's got some preliminary plans for that too, so we'll see how things fit together. We can get that scheduled in the near future and have a discussion of that. Bird: Mr. Mayor, before we get off this, I would just like to state that the city don't know how much Nick has saved us in dollars for the work he has done, and I really want to commend him for the work and you know I know he's like all firemen, he gets to sleep 24 hours a day and get paid for it, but we appreciate it. Anyway thank him very much Kenny. He's really saved us a lot of money and he's done a great job. Too bad he isn't a licensed architect. We wouldn't have no problem. B. GARY SMITH: DIGESTER FACILITIES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT TO EXISTING KELLER ASSOCIATES DESIGN CONTRACT: Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council members, the first item is an amendment to the contract that we presently have with Keller Associates for the design of our digester facilities upgrade. Part of their original agreement involved some preliminary investigation into converting the digesters from the mesophilic to thermophilic digestion, and what that means is that's a higher temperature digestion. John Shawcroft, superintendent, and the design engineer went back to Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin and visited a site back there that has utilized this thermophilic digestion and they concluded that yes, this was something that we needed to include in the upgrade of our digestion process, and so this amendment is to cover the engineering cost to include that phase of the upgrade into the design plan so that it can be built. And they are going to utilize as asub-consultant the firm that is in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin that recently completed Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 57 one of these processes, and that's part of this cost. The only problem that I had with all of this is that I'm a Green Bay Packer fan and I found out after the fact that Sturgeon Bay is about five minutes from Lambaugh Field and I didn't go. Anderson: They were in San Francisco losing. Bird: Gary this is a necessity. I mean this is something that we definitely need. Smith: Yes, sir. It's going to increase the quality of the sludge that comes out of the digestion process significantly. These things are operating at -the thermophilic digestion operates at about 120 degrees Fahrenheit. The digestion that is taking place now is in the high 90 degrees, so there's a significant increase in the heat production and the bacteria involvement in the digestion of the sludge, so we're going to get a lot better product. Anderson: Question. Does the additional heat, is that going to create more aroma around the plant? (End of Tape) ...as far as odor, odor hasn't come up. I guess that I tend to think that the odors with better digestion of the sludge we're going to get a better control on the odors than what we presently have. Along with the de-watering process that we are going to-in fact we are opening bids tomorrow or the next day on buying the centrifuge equipment for the de-watering process. So we are going to have what they call a class "A" sludge that comes out of this process. We won't have the restrictions at all that the 503 regs, I believe they are termed places on us right now with a class "B" sludge that we have to monitor so closely where the sludge goes forever, the ground testing, so forth. This class "A" sludge is-I think it is almost useable as it comes out for domestic use. Corrie: Comments or questions? Bird: I move that we enter into this amendment to the existing design contract with Keller & Associates for the sum of $18,820. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Okay, you want me to approve it, sign it? Bird: Excuse me, I forgot that. For the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Rountree: I'll second that too. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 58 Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we approve the motion by Mr. Bird and seconded by Mr. Rountree to approve the lump sum amount of $18,820 for the contract. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Smith: Second item that I have is a short form contract for the drilling of exploratory test well for Well #8. The sum of $21,511.90 for Steven and Sons Well Drilling in Boise. Corrie: Any comments or questions? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we enter into this contract with Steven and Son Well Drilling for Well site #8 and for the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest in the sum of $21,511.90. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Rountree to enter into the contract and mayor to sign, clerk to attest. Well site #8 by Steven and Son Well Drilling Incorporated for the amount of $21,511.90. Any further discussion? Hearing none, al those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Smith: Third item that I have is the request to the city to enter into an engineering agreement for the design and construction monitoring for the pump and pumphouse for city Well #18, which is located on Lot 12, Block A to Summerfield Subdivision #1 and that's located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Locust Grove Road and Ustick Road. We have several years previous drilled a test well there. We have all the hydro-geologic information on that site and it's part of a small park area for the subdivision. We've also have had power installed, power transformer installed there and this is a well site for-the council declared an emergency for me so that we could get a well driller started and he will be on the site the 15~ of February to start the drilling. The civil engineer disagreement will allow the civil engineer to complete the design facilities, the design of the facilities for the pump and pumphouse. He did have a small start on this some time ago when we started out with the test well. This contract would be with civil survey consultants they have been doing our pump and pumphouse l Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 59 installations since Well #14. They have done a great job and they are quite reasonable in their costs and they're very responsive. So I would request that you approve of this engineering agreement with Civil Survey Consultants Incorporated of Meridian, Idaho. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: That's both a design fee and construction fee? Smith: Yes, the design service fee is shown on page 3 down at the bottom last paragraph is not to exceed the amount of $10,464.50 without prior approval of the owner and they're estimating construction services fees at approximately $7,303.50. Bird: Not to exceed again, Gary, on the $7,303.50 Smith: So far that would be a good statement, yes sir. Bird: Is that how you need in a motion, not to exceed, or just... Smith: Well... Bird: If it's not to exceed, then they can't go over it. Is there a chance they can go over it? Smith: There is if they have problems, I don't expect it that they will. In the past experience they haven't. We've stayed under their estimates so, however you want to handle that. Bird: I'll put not to exceed incase... Smith: It just depends on if they run into some problems. Anderson: You just get a change order or... Bird: Mr. Mayor I would like to make a motion that Meridian City enters into a professional service agreement with Civil Survey Consultant for Well #18, Lot 12, Block 8, Summerfield Subdivision #1. The design fee be $10,464.50 and the construction fee to be $7,303.50. The mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Bentley and motion stated by Mr. Bird. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 60 Smith: The last item that I have is the bid results for janitorial services for the city buildings. This was kind of a joint effort between the City Clerk Will Berg and myself. I put some bid documents together and Will kind of shepherded it through the bid process and gathering of information. He has thankfully put together a memorandum together, thank you will for putting together the memorandum together that kind of outlined what took place in soliciting these bids. We had five bidders. The bids ranged from a low of $1,883 per month by Enviro-clean of Meridian to $3,600 per month by Maid in the Desert. Will made some calls to and requested some references from the two low bidders the low and the second low and based on the references that were supplied he and I guess Angel made some calls to get some information, Brittney to get some information. They asked six questions, the same questions of each one of the references and you can see by the responses, particularly on Enviro-clean that they varied. Custom cleaning service for the most part had very similar comments to the questions or answers to the questions. The very last page that Will has put together in your packet shows the amount that is presently being paid by the city for services that we have by various people, companies. You can kind of compare that with what the low bid is and what the second low bid is. The other thing that isn't reflected in that last page is, I might add, that the City of Meridian right now is providing all the cleaning equipment and the cleaning materials. The paper products, soaps, so forth, so that would be in addition to that $2,716 that we are presently paying. Cowie: I think we are also we are paying a little bit of workman's comp for some of them aren't we? Bird: We better not, they are contract. Smith: Well, I'm not sure we are, probably should be, or somebody... it's not reflected in this price, no sir. Cowie: You mean in this one here? Smith: In the $2,716 is not. The bid prices that we received do reflect workman's comp. They also reflect the fact that they are supplying all the materials, they are supplying all the equipment for the cleaning process. Vacuum cleaners, dusters, rags, all the paper products, paper towels in the restrooms, cleaning solutions. Shampoo for cleaning the carpets, wax for vinyl floors and that sort of thing. That is all part of the bid. It's a package deal. The city isn't involved in it, it's just... Bird: Certificate of insurance and liability and everything? They were all capable of meeting the minimum standards? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 61 Smith: Based on their bid, yes sir. I didn't require a bid bond on their bids, but there is a requirement for insurance, a certain level of insurance, liability insurance and also, there is a requirement that they pass a security investigation by the police department, background check, excuse me. Bird: Are these two low capable of handling this? What they've got here is not very big buildings, absolutely not very much. (Inaudible) builders don't have much more than I do. Igo back to the old saying, the lowest isn't always the best. Smith: Mayor and council, I think Shari would like to make a comment too concerning Enviro-clean. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and council, the only concern that I had was that they are presently located, they are operating out of their home in Gem Park Subdivision. They have no accessory use permit, or conditional use permit. I kind of hate to see the-probably the fact that they do have the low bid is because they are not running a legitimate place of business and they are competing against people that are. Bird: That's right. Can I ask you one question, Will or anybody. What is the liability that they have to-do we require the city when we hire a subcontractor to put up the $500,000 liability bond which we've changed in that ordinance? Any subcontractor working for us should have that, right? Gigray: I don't know that we have a policy in place to deal with that in terms of minimum requirements. We could research to see whether you have such a one in place. I'm not aware that you do. Now, you may have a practice of making that requirement and you can make it a specific practice by making it a bid requirement when you send out the invitation for bids, which is what I believe is what Gary has done. Bird: What did you put on there? Smith: The-as far as insurance requirements are concerned, their workman's compensation was required by the state statutory limits for the state. The employers liability was statutory. Comprehensive General Liability bodily injury $500,000 each occurrence and annual (Inaudible) ,property damage $500,000 each occurrence and annual (Inaudible) and personal injury $500,000 annual (Inaudible). Bird: That's our general. That's okay now, can they meet these? Smith: Well, they have to provide that certificate of insurance before the notice to proceed is issued. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 62 Bird: Well yeah, I realize that, but has anybody checked to see if these two low bidders are capable of-that one is working out of their house, I would really question if they can come up with $500,000 liability. Smith: As part of the bid process, we never ask for (Inaudible) until we give them notice of the award and then they have a certain time in order to come back with the requirements, sign the contract, provide the certificate of insurance. Bird: I'm familiar with one of them real well, they were used a lot on big commercial jobs, they do a lot of clearing. They are next to high, I guarantee you that they are a legitimate business and will be there everyday and have got the people to do it. I love saving $1,000, but if we give a contract, we get half service in the first place before I give out the results and ask them if they are capable. You are entitled to do that. Say hey, I want to see your certificate of insurance, who is your policy holder and I want to see your workman's comp thing. I have a feeling that you are going to be surprised... Corrie: I would recommend to the council that they be very cautious about Enviro- clean. If they are not even up to standards as far as (Inaudible) are concerned, we are contributing to the delinquency of the cleaning company. Bentley: My preference would be to go with Western Building. Corrie: Don't have to go with the low bidder. Bentley: I know, and we are sitting virtually at what we are paying now, but we are paying for all the equipment and all the supplies. So we still would be saving money with them. Bird: Can't do that. You can't take-we have to disqualify (Inaudible) before we can do that. Gigray: Well this is a bid for services, not for equipment. Corrie: So you are not under statute. Bird: You don't have to take the low bidder? Gigray: No, it's a matter of-it would just be if somebody wanted to raise the issue politically. That's-you have to decide this is in the best interest of the city for whatever reason. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 63 Smith: Well when the city clerk calls the bidders and informs them who the bid was awarded to, they are going to ask why and in all fairness we need to have some kind of response to the people that did submit a bid as to why... Bird: Was this publicly open? Smith: Yes. There was... Bird: Does everybody know what they bid? Smith: There was one person at the bid opening and he was next to high, Mr. Harris, he was in the middle wasn't he? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the council, if the issue over the compliance of Enviro-if they-according to your records and that office that they are showing, they're not in compliance with city ordinance, you could say that you request verification as to whether they are or not, prior to whatever time and then could continue this to determine when do you have to make (Inaudible). Smith: Sixty days from the day of the bid opening. We have 60 days to make the award. The bid was open December 22"d. Gigray: If you have a known commodity, if the council feels they have someone that they know does a good job based on experience-I suppose that is a good answer to that one. Berg: Mr. Mayor, members of the council, as usual with my experience of bids, either you have lots of them and you have problems, or you don't have any of them and you don't have any problems. This janitorial service, the more we dealt into it, the more uneasy it gets to be to figure out quality of service versus price. You can't say absolutely that this person is not going to give you the quality of service with the lowest price, but you have this thing in the back of your mind that I don't think we were paying outlandish prices for janitorial services, but if you compound the cost of the service by adding supplies and equipment and they're still almost half of what you are paying now, it seems to make you wonder if someone didn't read the bid package, or are you missing something from the whole picture. So, I've talked to Gary quite a bit, since this isn't my expertise for janitorial service, if there are some other things that we can do, ask more questions, give more references, but I feel we have to justify to whoever we don't give the bid to why. We had Shari drive by and look at the residence, of course it's a residence, but we don't know if it's like some of the businesses that they operate their billing and telephone service out of their house, and they actually do their work out of a storage unit, or somebody else's business. So there are a lot of assumptions that I don't want to get saying that well, we think this or we think that, if you want us to Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 64 investigate further, we will, but we are on some kind of a tight deadline trying to get this resolved in January. I know several of departments would like to have janitorial services. Rountree: It seems to me that there is some question as to the ability for Enviroclean to give us the level of service that we would expect, and I think on that basis we could reject it just on the information we received from the interviews, it seems to be clear that they don't do a particularly good job for any of their clients. Not to mention how they may reside and work out of their home in Meridian. I heard what Mr. Bird said about Custom Cleaning Services, that their accounts don't look particularly big, but they seem satisfied. In fact, it's not often that you get better than average janitorial service from the ones that I've been involved with. It's usually a continual battle. I don't see any reason why we would reject them. It seems to me that they've put together a professional proposal. They've got some professional accounts, their accounts seem satisfied. Granted Western Buildings could do it, but they are big and they've had an opportunity to get big because of accounts like ours. I would say that we look at Custom Cleaning Services, give them an opportunity to perform, if they don't pertorm, let's have an out clause that is very clear on our contract with them that due to nonperformance or dissatisfaction they are out within however many days we can work in the contract. Whatever they are willing to sign and deal with the next highest bidder. I've got to think if they are willing to please the customers that we've contacted, they are going to be willing to please us. (Inaudible) Bird: Who are you giving that to Charlie? (Inaudible) Rountree: Custom Cleaning Service. Bird: Oh, the next one up the 2100? Bentley: They still have to go through the scrutiny of the police department anyway. Bird: They also have to get their proof of liability in. Rountree: They have to meet all the terms and conditions that they were presented, if they can't... Bird: Is that a motion Charlie? ~~~ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 65 Rountree: I would move that we proceed and enter into an agreement for janitorial services with Custom Cleaning Services authorize the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, seconded by Mr. Bird to (Inaudible) the requirements that Mr. Rountree stated in the Custom Cleaning Services be awarded the contract based upon the conditions. Any further comments or discussion? Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Just a point of information, I don't know what the bid specs required, but it would seem to me to be advisable that the city have an option to provide notice of termination of the contract without cause. When you get into cause in the government area, raises some issues. If they would allow us to do that, I think that's the best way. If you don't like it, just give them the notice it's going to take awhile to transfer to somebody else anyway. Rountree: Right, that's a good point. Smith: Item #10 in the agreement is-it deals with termination and it says this agreement may be terminated immediately by owner by for breach of this agreement by janitor and either party may terminate this agreement by 30 days written notice of termination to the other party. Bird: That takes care of it. Corrie: They understand they have to go through the police? Smith: Yes sir, that was part of the specifications. Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: So you will do that Mr. Berg, give you that leeway there Gary. Smith: I would just to say one more thing, I wish each and everyone of you a happy new year and all the best for this coming year. I think it's going to be very busy again. We haven't had any winter yet, no one has slowed down, it's still going great guns. Thanks a lot for your support. Corrie: I believe I didn't see approval of response letter to Bureau of Reclamation Mr. Bill Gigray. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 66 Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I have prepared here which is an inner office memorandum which I circulated to Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, and Tom Kuntz for their comment about proposal for the res~onse to the letter that was sent by the department of interior dated December 4 h, 1998 concerning their proposal to transfer their interest in certain property to the Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District. I have attached to the material that I've just handed to you a copy of the letter that was sent by the department of interior and of course in this instance, we would propose that the letter be addressed to the Mr. Steve Dunn at the Bureau as is requested on the last page of the letter from the Bureau and this proposal would propose that the mayor would sign this letter as an official response on behalf of the city. As I understand it and Gary, Shari and Tom can correct me if I'm wrong they have basically approved the form of this particular letter. What this letter proposes to do is first set out that it's official response. It's been authorized by the council. Secondly, is to address the interest of the city in this matter as to why it is responding. It tries to make a strong statement of the fact that the providing park and recreational amenities throughout the city for it's residences and important goal of the city and I'm summarizing this, that it is growing at unprecedented rates and basically the need for this type of development is increasing and in this instance, we have a situation where the juxtaposition of the various canals and laterals and drains throughout the city and the planning jurisdiction is quite extensive and of course a quicker view of the map would clearly establish that. Then we try to set out in this proposal of what the city's concern is, understanding that we want to be delicate in the way that it's presented. First is that the-our first interest of course and concern is to maintain our ability to maximize what we have already established as the city's interest and then the history and experience of the city officials was what I have heard over the months that I have been here and dealing with department heads and yourselves with regards to the concern about what the bureaus proposal is. That is and I've worded this, it is the perception of this city that the Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District finds that development of pedestrian pathways and parkway uses is not in it's best interest. So we are not saying well they're this or that, it's our perception based on their history and that they've shown some flexibility with regards to existing parkways along drainage ways and then stating that the city appreciate and anticipates that they will continue with that flexibility but they have not shown flexibility on canals and laterals and the city anticipates that position will continue and that in the event this action is forth coming they may become even less flexible. So the third part of the letter is a request that the department consider transferring it's interest to the city on the condition that the city would continue to pursue the designation of these areas as part of it's park and recreational system and that at such time as it would determine that an area is totally unsuitable for that development the city would then transfer or assign it's interest to the Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District and then an alternate part of the request would be a minimum as an alternative that the bureau transfer their interest to the district, that-upon the condition that the district in good faith would negotiate with the City of Meridian for an appropriate license Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 67 agreement and I say similar in format to existing license agreement, we've just about got that concluded. I have received (Inaudible) revisions who included a lot of the requests that we had made of them as a result of our meeting. I have sent back my response to that which was a couple more requests, I haven't heard back from him since my last letter. Then saying that's only a back up position of the city. Sothis was sent out as a proposal. We do have to respond by the 15th. I can advise you that the facts which is the foundation for Ada County Trail Systems which is really the reinstated article and name of the former Boise River Foundation which has to do with the development of the Boise River. Green Belt is definitely in support of this position and their board has asked if the city responds, could they have a copy of the letter and I said if the City Council would grant that permission I would share a draft that the city would respond with their people. Also, it's my understanding in talking to Judy Peavey-Derr that Ada Planning is in very supportive of what I would anticipate the city's position is. I've talked to Norm Holme who is the Planning and Zoning Director of the City of Nampa, knowing that Larry Bledsoe was now gone, I was concerned that their might be a lack of communication in Nampa about this very issue and alerted him that they needed to respond as well and I would hope that we might get permission to share what the city's response is with Nampa so that they might respond as well. So anyway, this was the kick off of proposed response for your consideration. Bentley: Further more with that, APA discussed this briefly at the last meeting, last month and all the cities that were there from Ada County, representing Ada County and they are all against this also. Nampa and Caldwell were in attendance also. It is going to be further discussion in the January meeting and I really look for some resolution to come out of them in support of either giving it to the city or to the counties and keeping away from Nampa/Meridian. Gigray: I was advised that I think Commissioner Bisterfeldt was particularly at one meeting I know that Judy Peavey-Derr attended was pretty adamant about not wanting this to happen so there could be numerous (Inaudible). Rountree: A couple of comments. I think the basic letter is well founded and good. There is a couple of areas that I think we might want to address in the first interest of the city. Not only are we looking at pedestrian ways and recreational amenities but I think we are also looking at aesthetic amenities in some neighborhoods and we have some real eye sores out there because of poor care and maintenance and lack of cooperation on the part of Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District to do things. So I think we need to address those aspects even when they are not suitable for parkways and that sort of thing, they have to be incorporated in the context of our community not just these open areas or these areas of noxious weeds and blight. So we need to address that as one of our issues. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 68 Gigray: Could I have a question, because that's a real good point. Would we be in a position to say that we would take over that or we would be in a position to care for that, would that be part of our parks and rec area? I'm just trying to figure out how to fit it in here, because that's how I've kind of posed this. Rountree: That is something that the council would certainly have to consider, but I would think that our first choice would be to work cooperatively with the neighborhoods, the subdivisions to see if we couldn't work something out with the neighborhood associations and our developers, but at last resort, if it fit well with our pedestrian ways and park systems, yeah we probably ought to. Get some of these areas cleaned up, like the stretch of the canal there off of Cherry Lane between the Christian Church and the Vineyards coming out of the high school, it's never going to look any better than it does now, and it's an eyesore to stop and look at it. There's things like that out south that are going on with open fences and weeds on one side and yards on the other. I would hope that we would commit if we could get control of those rights-of-way that we would look towards improving them, even if we did nothing, they probably wouldn't get any worse. If we did nothing more than mow the weeds and gather up the... Gigray: Static's and just general maintenance, weed control. Rountree: Weed control, trash removal. Then on the second page under the third, the city request, the second paragraph B, at a minimum alternative transfer to the bureaus interest. I think that is too wishy-washy in terms of us being able to control our destiny there. I think if it goes to Nampa/Meridian, it should go to Nampa/Meridian only upon, in our case, our community and Nampa/Meridian executing a memorandum of agreement or understanding or some kind of binding document that outlines the use, the care and the maintenance of those corridors within the city limits, in the city-or within the area of impact in the City of Meridian. Only until that's satisfactory or that's executed to the satisfaction of both parties would that transfer take place. Otherwise we want it. Gigray: I throw it out as an option. I thought you may want to say I don't want to do that at all and strike it out. I though it would be easier to through out some options. Rountree: I don't have a problem with them having it as long as they understand that we're going to be a player. Not a sit back one. Other than that, I think it's pretty sound. What you might want to do-get a hold of Jim and bounce it off of him. I'll get you his number if you don't have it. I think you've got his card. Gigray: I have that note. Rountree: Call him up, he said he would be more than willing to give us an editorial. There is a key point that you'll kick them over you'll probably have it then. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 69 Bentley: I agree. Corrie: We need a motion to authorize to have the letter signed and... Rountree: I make a motion that Meridian City Council and mayor authorize the further editorial of the letter to the Bureau of Reclamation dated in response to their letter dated 12/17/98. Continue drafting be done by the city attorney and provide final document for signature by... Bentley: Response has to be in by the 15rn Rountree: January 11, 1999, for circulation and signature. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree and seconded by Mr. Bentley to approve the motion as stated. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All aye. Corrie: Request for Darlene Stutzman regarding vacation of public right-of-way. That was denied once and needs to reapply I think. Shari do you want-Will go ahead and give your speech. Berg: I guess I had the privilege of being contacted by Darlene, which ever she goes by, as I know her as Ms. Stutzman and she said she needed to make a requirement from ACHD for this application. This was during the time that Shari was on her vacation and so I told her she needed to submit a letter to the City Council to get this on the agenda and I think Shari has further comments to the in-depth of the previous stories behind this situation. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and council, Ms. Stutzman did come in previously and request a vacation of the right-of-way at that time it was denied by council. As part of the Sterling Creek Subdivision staff had requested that they make that a pedestrian walkway, however, that requirement was removed by council, but it is a perfect walkway over to Five Mile Creek, although they did have access to Five Mile Creek in other areas. There currently exists an old railroad car, what is that, some kind of railroad car or something, it's there to stay I think. People use it now as a walkway. Washington would align almost perfectly with that existing bridge over the Five Mile Creek. Then across the Five Mile Creek is-it's not called a pedestrian walkway, it's a drainage lot that goes to Danbury's Subdivision, but there is access through two Danbury Subdivision in that area and the people in Danbury Fair have expressed concern that that be maintained as a pathway. I assured them that if the vacation was considered in ~. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 70 the future there would be another application and they would get the opportunity to testify at the public hearing. That's what she needs to do, she is going through the Ada County Highway District process apparently, I guess it's already been denied once, she would just have to start over as far as... Gigray:.) represent a highway district, so I'm somewhat familiar with street vacations and issues regarding cities. I know that you have a county wide highway district over here. When I saw this, it posed an-it's the first one of these that I've seen but I do think one of the issues here that we may want to think about is how we process any kind of application for street vacations. Ada County Highway District is the one that has jurisdictional authority to do it, but they can't do it without the approval of the city. In my view the best policy on these would be that the city not entertain such action unless they file the petition with the Ada County Highway District, they've noticed all of the hearings, then we could hear it as part of that process and make our comments and decision as part of a filed petition. My concern would be that someone files a petition, you take an action, say yeah, we approve this, if you do, for how long? What's it subject to? What are the conditions? Where is the staff reports? It seems to me if they file a legitimate petition to vacate a property then there is some legal process in place and then we could deal with that as an (Inaudible). As I saw this, it didn't look like-has she applied? Stiles: Previously she had Gigray: It's been denied? Stiles: Yes. Gigray: I think... Rountree: That's the way the record sits at this point. So until she goes back through ACHD we are done with her. Gigray: Yeah, because I think otherwise you would be entertaining these things all the time. They would come in here and want to get a read from you-will you approve this, then I'll go over to ACHD to make my petition. I think that is where they ought to go and then you can take a look at, get the staff reports that you need and then take action on whether you would approve it or not. Corrie: Send her back. Okay, anyone want to handle these two resolutions tonight? Bird: Which ones? Corrie: Resolution 172 and 208 changing the-well, let's we've got one for empowering the city treasurer to make investments. That's superceding resolution 208. We have in Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 71 your packet this supercedes and gives the chance that the states that the city treasurer is (Inaudible) invest Idaho funds and then the committee is set up. If they want to hear it it's not on the council agenda, but go ahead. We need to get this going. Gigray: Since the action taken on December 15th and the resolution that was passed, on that data I've met with Dean Buffington and Kari McNeal of that firm. Their concern was as the resolution was previously passed, it provided that we would establish an account with Buffington and Moore and they were also a little concerned with whether or not a committee that had a condition that there be an actual signing by one other member might require meeting and a process problem in terms of what their needs are with regards to how the investment process would actually work in the field. So in response to that comment I have submitted for your consideration a resolution which would supercede the original one, so that the original one would stay in place and then this would just take over at some point as you might pass it... (END OF TAPE) Gigray: What it does is it in terms of the language of this particular resolution provides that in part four here that the city treasurer is hereby authorized and directed and empowered to seek investment advise from Buffington, Moore, McNeal and so on in accordance with their proposal to the city rather than establish an account there and assign all necessary documents together the clerk to carry out the directive and empowerment and then in part three the city treasurer is hereby directed and empowered by this resolution to invest such idle funds of the city as reasonable upon the advice and approval of the investment committee which advice and approval may occur at such times as provides efficiency and decision making and the management of investment accounts. The idea was to try and make this so it could work in the field. The committee could do the job that you ask it to do and of course the state law requires the empowerment be to the city treasurer. As this was done before it required the signing and you could still have the clerk attest or you could have a committee member do that, but the-anyway, I've submitted this, Dean Buffington has commented that this is fine. It's slightly different than what you did before. (Inaudible) Bird: I move that we, what are we going to number the resolution number? Rountree: As a new one, 208. Bird: This is going to be 208 again? Rountree: 208A. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 72 Gigray: Whatever your next number is, 209. Bird: I move that we accept the past resolution 209. The suspension of rules? (Inaudible) Unknown: Don't have to worry about that. Bird: For the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Rountree that resolution 209 be approved and mayor to sign and city clerk to attest. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Thank you we got that one. Do you want to do the other resolution, amending resolution 172, there was just some lines taken out. Bird: This is on that time and a half? Corrie: Yeah. Just changing the date August 26t" to September 26~", 1998. Is that correct Mr. Gigray that is all that was changed on that? Gigray: It was just a house keeping matter and I think I did a little memo that you have with it just saying that I under the open meeting law I think you can do this, I believe the mayor and the clerk have exercised good faith in putting all matters on the agenda and you can add (Inaudible). Rountree: Just a question, what's the difference between August and September? Gigray: This was advice that I received from the clerks office that this needed to be changed and I think this has to do with when this would take effect and that it needed to take effect in September, not in August. Bird: Was it because the fiscal year ending or what? Rountree: It doesn't end in September. Bird: That's what I was going to say. September 26~" would be the... Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 73 Gigray: Maybe the best thing to do would be to table this till next meeting and we can clarify what the origins of this request were. I did receive a request (Inaudible). Anderson: Don't have to table it because it isn't on the agenda. Bird: No. Corrie: I'll bring it off and put it on the agenda next time. I'll even find out... Smith: Mr. Mayor, I think that date came about during the length of time that the discussions were going on concerning the administrative leave time that the exempt employees had accumulated. Bentley: Well lets work it out and do it next time. Bird: We'll get it next time. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. One thing, Gary on your transportation taskforce the speed limits have already been changed on Meridian Road. Smith: Good. Bird: Mr. Mayor, we as a council has got one thing to do here. This is the first meeting of January and we need to elect our new council president and vice president. So if you will entertain a motion, I make a motion to nominate somebody. Corrie: Are you all ready for it? Bird: I'm ready, are you ready Ron, you ready Charlie? Rountree: It's still today. Bird: I move that we-I nominate Charles Rountree as council president. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Bentley to nominate Mr. Charlie Rountree as continuous president of the council for the year 1999. Any further comments? Rountree: I guess the only comment that I would have before you cast your ballot, in the way of discussion, if that's the case, there may be some assignment changes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 74 Bird: Whatever you want to do, that's your baby. Rountree: Okay. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I nominate Glen Bentley as Vice President of the Meridian City Council. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Charlie Rountree that Mr. Glen Bentley be nominated as Vice President of the council. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Now I'll entertain a motion... Rountree: I just have-it's really not an item, but the planning session for the end of the month, everybody up for that? Corrie: I won't be here, but... Rountree: Two things that I've got is we want a session with Mr. Gigray about where we are going with process and procedure and we'll get with-get you more specifics. We also want an affidavit from you that we will get this stuff sooner for council meetings. If he wants to meet with us or talk about the things that they want to do in the way of trash pick up, recycle, programs that they think they would like to offer the City of Meridian, those are the only two things that I have at this point for that meeting. Give me your thoughts and ideas for that and we'll schedule it for the last week in January. Bird: Are you going to do it the 26th Charlie? Rountree: We would normally do it the 26th, yeah. With that I'll move to adjourn. Corrie: Also I need to talk to you about (Inaudible) we can talk about that later. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we adjourn all in favor say aye. ( ~ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 75 MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:53 (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) r D. CORRIE. MAYOR "~,,,n„„tp~+~ ATTEST o'rs'{ ~ ~~~*''~~, 's ~~. $~L ~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., LERK s a" a ,70' r 181; , ~P~`*~.~ ( RECEIVED PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET J A ~J - 5 1999 NAME: PHONE NUMBER: CITY OF MERIDIAN ~~;Z:~--Hll~:~~~~~~~~==--~~~-=-~- i-~~ - :&i-~~~=~__~ ~ k'-. ^} . --. ~ rr l{ fCCC( ---------------------~~--S~-----------------------_______ _________________________________ ~~:l~-tf;;;;~J~-------------------------~; :~~~-~? ~1__________ -~-----~~--------------------- -----------------------------~~~-------------- ~-~~~~~--~~---~~~-~~~~~~~~--~-~~---~~~~-~~~~~-~~--~-~~~~~~~~~~~~-~----~-~-~~~~~~--~-~---~ ~~-~~-~~~-~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~-~~~-~~~~-~~-~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~-~~~-~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~-~~~~~- ~-~~~~~~~-~~~~~-~~ ~-~~~~~~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~-~-~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~-~~~---~~~-~~~~~~-~~~~~-~~~~-~-~-~~--~-~~-~~~~~-~~~~~-~~~~~~-~~ ~~~~~~~--~~~---~~~~~~-~-~~~---~~~~~~~~~~~--~-~~~-~~-~-~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~-~~~~--~-~~~-~~~~~-~~-~~~-~-~-~ ~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~-~~--~-~~~~~~-~~~~--~~~~-~~-~~-~~-~-~~~--~~~~~-~~~---~--~~~- ~~~~~~-~~~~~~-~-~-~~-~~~ ~~~~~-~~~-~~~~~-~~~~-~~~~~~-~~~~-~~~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~-~--~~-~~~~-~~~~~~-~~~--~~~--~~ ~~~~--~~~--~~~~~-~~~-~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~-~~~-~~-~~-~~~~~--~~~~~~--~-~~~~-~~~~- ~-~~~-~~~~---~~~~~~---~~~-~~-~~~-~-~~-~-~~-~--~~~-~~~~-~~~~-~~~~~~~-~~~~-~~~--~~~~~-~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~- ~~~~~~~~~~--~-~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~-~--~-~~~-~~~~~~-~~-~~-~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~-~~~-~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~~ ~~-~~-~~~~----~~~~~--~~~-~~-~~~~~~~~~-~~----~~~~-~~~-~~~~-~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~-~~~~~-~~~~~-~-~~-~---~-~~~~~ ~--~~---~~-~--~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~--~-~-~~~~~~-~-~~~-~~~-~~-~~~~-~~-~-~~-~~~-~-~-~-~~--~~--~~-~~~~---~~-~~~~- ~~~~~~-~~~---~~-~~-~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~---~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~-~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~--~~--~~~~--~~-~~~~~-~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~-~-~~-~~~-~-~~-~~-~-~--~~~~~~--~~~~~~-~-~--~-~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~-~ ~~~-~~~~~-~~~~~~--~---~---~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~-~~~~-~~-~--~~~~~----~~~~~-~~~~-~ ~ NAME: PHONE NUMBER: RECEIVED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF lVIERIDIAN PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET ~~---~~-------~~~~----~~~~~~~----~~~~~----~-~~--------~~~~ _Lil~~--Ad:., c> 08;f -1-~ II. ~~~-~~~-~~--~~------~~-~~---~-~---~--~~~~~----~~~ -~~~~---~~~~~-~~-------~~--~--~--~~~-~-~~--------~-~~--~-~~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~----~~~-~~-------~~--- ~~-----~-~--~---~-------~-----~-~~-~-~-~~-~~~--~~~-~---~~~---~-~~-~~~~~~~~~----~----~-~-~~------ ~--~-~--~~~-----~-~~~~---~----~~~~~--~-----------~--~-~~~--~~-~~~-~~~~~~~~--------~---~~~----------~ ~~~------~~-~~~---~----~~~--~~----~~~--~---~~---~~~~---~~~~-~~---~~~--~~~~-----~---~~--~-~~~~~~~- --~~~~------~-~~~~~~~~~~------~---~~-~~----~~-~~~-~~~---~~~--~~-~~~~~---~-~--~-~~~~---~------~~~~---- ~-----~----~--~~~~~~~~~~--~--~---~-----~~~~~~--~--~~-~-~~~~~-~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~---~~~-~---~ ~--~--~~---------------~~~~--~--~~~~-~~~-~---~~~~~~--~~~-----~~~~~~~-~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~~--~~~-~--~~~--~-----~~~----~ ---~~~-----~~-~~~~~~~~---~----~~~-~~--~---~~-~-~~-~~~------~~~~~~---~~~~---~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~-~~~---~~~-----~ -~---~~~~----~~---------~-~~-~~~-~~~~-~~~----~~~~--~~--~~~~-~~-~---~~-~---~~~~~~~-~~~~~~--~~~~-~~-~~~~~---~~~- ~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~--~-~~~~~---~~-~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~-~~~~~~~---~~~~~~~~~-~~~---~~~~~~-~~~-~~~-----~~--- ~~~~-----~~~~-~~~~~~~~-~~---~~-~~~---~-~---~~~~~~~~---~~~~------~~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~---~~~~~~-----~--~~--~-~~~~--~~~- ~~~~----~~~-~~~~-~-~~-~--~~---~~~--~~~~---~---~~~-~~~-~~~~---~--~~~~--~~~~-~---~~~~~~~---~~---~----~~~~----~ -----~~~----~----~~--~-~~~~~~--~---~~~--~~-~~-~~~~---~~~~~------~~~~~~--~~~~--~~~~~~~~----~~~-~~---~----~~--~- --~----~~-------~----~-----~~~~--~-~~~~-~~~~~~~~-----~~~~-------~~~~~--~~---~~~~~~-~~-----~~---~---~----~~~~~- --~--~~~~~~------------~--~-~-~~-~-~--~~~~~~---------~~~~~-~--~~~~~~-----~~-~~~~~~-------~~---~~-~~~---~~--~~- ~~----~~-~-~----~~~-------~-~~~---~~-~~~~~~~~~---~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~-~~~-~~~~-~~~--~~-~~-~~---~- -~-~~~~~-----------~~-~~~~~~-~-----~--~~~~~~------~~------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----~~~----~~~~----~~-~~-~~~--~~---~~ ~~~~~~-~-~-~----~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~---~~--~~~-------~----~~~~~--~~~~~-~~~~~~~-~~--~~~~---~~~~-~--~-~------~-~~~~- "\ ITEM NUMBER: B COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED ORDINANCE AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. f1/ (v" r1f ( CITY OF MERIDIAN ORDINANCE NO. go 8 BY COUNCIL MEMBER t!jzal-I/e AJUIt t/7!e- (!Buh~t'I~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, AMENDING CHAPTER 22, TITLE VIII, SECTION 8-2208 (B) FOR CHANGES THERETO TO ESTABLISH AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT FOR A FIDUCIARY BOND, OF THE REVISED AND COMPILED ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Section 1: Amend Chapter 22, Title VIII, Section 8-2208 (B). WHEREAS, the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian, County of Ada, State of Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of the City to amend Section 8-2208 (8) of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian to establish an appropriate amount for a fiduciary bond. Section 2: That Chapter 22, Title VIII, Section 8-2208 (B), of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian, be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: 8-2208 (B): General and personal liability insurance for bodily injury, sickness, disease or death sustained by persons and arising out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with property and contract rights. The minimum limits for such insurance shall be one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) per person and three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000.00) per incident or occurrence five hundred thousand dollars ($500.0,00.00) for the result of anyone (1) occurrence or accident regardless of the number of persons iniured or the number of claimants. Section 3: DATE OF EFFECT. This ordinance shall take effect within one month after its passage and publication, according to law. AMEND TITLE 8, CHAPTER 22, SECTION 8-2208 (8) OF THE PRIVATE SECURITY SERVICES ORDINANCE PASSED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 5..f!: day of da,#"t(;La':j , 199.1'1 APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this f3-t!:. day of ,;Tanua.J ' 199( q ~- . ---- .... _ /...-- /f ATTEST: 2 AMEND TITLE 8, CHAPTER 22, SECTION 8-2208 (8) OF THE PRIVATE SECURITY SERVICES ORDINANCE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5. 1999 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS ITEM NUMBER: 250 REQUEST: WILL BERG - REQUEST BY D'ARLENE STUZMAN AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: 1/V~ ~p Jr1~-fo MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: ~ S~rL ~ -to j~-~ SETTLERS IRRIGATION: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTH ER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. (- - (~ { RECEIVED DEe 2 8 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN Custom Designing · Quality Materials Guaranteed Workmanship 1154 CATHY LANE - MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 _ PHONE (208)888-1928 n ~ :t<~) 99i ~ '. &j1 ~ A)) . ~ .A: . cf. . ~ 0 < ' ~~c/~ ~L.~~~~ /J ~1 ~j , ~ ~ J:2~~+-duJo;:{ . .. /46-3 NeilD t/~ C'/) r;~~- -J \J . LJJJ;;L~ /r~~ -0., . ~ .. ~ _~~~CL- sJ~ J2. ~~f;~6 '-r~rr ~ -t L-b- ~ ' ~~P4~ ~ 50/~(J' <J). ~ t-Comes r .. '1.- ~ , .. ( 1 "1 SHERI?Y R. HUSER, Preslc=en r ~US,AN s. EASTLAKe, Vice PresidenT JA^-,lES E. 6f1UCE. Secrerory De~r :\pplicanc ) ~n U:Jry ~ 3, t 996 !; Rc: Vilc:1rlon and Abandonm<:nt of Public Righr(s)-ot:Way This is to advise you of the procedures for making ::In ::tpp I iC'ltion for vac:uion :md abandonment of public rig-ht(s)- ot:way. AppJiC:!.rions tor vacation 0 f pub lie right( s )-M.way shall be Ii led in writing with rhe Right,of- Way Dep,llim~ nr 0 f rh~ Ada County Highway District at :; 18 East:; 7th,S rreer. Bo ISe. fdaho 83 71~, EACH APPLICA nON SHALL CONT Ar.-.l THE FOLLOWING: I. An applici1tion fee ofS600.00. This application t~e d~frays Costs 0 f statT Investigations. legal oldvcCiisement and administfcl[ive com incurred by the Highway District in processing the vac:ltion o1pplication. Cosrs in rhe processing orrhe vilco.tion Jpplic<1tion. in ~xcess of 560000 will be invoiced tu o.pplicant on .:ompletion ot' vac:Jtion proccdur~s. 2. A peeition signed by property owners, in.c luding riam<:ls. J.ddresses and iel<:lphon~ :lumbers. which are Jdjacenc to the righhJf.wClY sought to be vacaeed and o.b:lndoned, who consent to the vocaeion. The ilPplic:ltion muse conca!n signatures of ALL Jdjaccnr property owners or reJ.sons for noe obeaining their consent approval. ~ Q Consent in writing, by the Cicy Council of re~peccive Cie;..' if wIthin one (() mile of City Limies. if ehe VaCo.tlon is \.'1 ithin a Platt~d Subd fvision. .!. The name. address and telephone nLlmber of the appllc:me ~d the applicJ.nC's representative. 5. A st:Lremenr of rhe reasons for the vacation appllc:J.tlon. 6. A mop or plat showing the Ilre.l 0 fright-of.way which is the subject of ehe vllc:ltion olpplic:nion. (Note: A m:Jp or plat of existing right-of-way mflY be available In rhe office of che Ada County Highway District) 7. A legal descriprion of right-o f-way which is sought to be vac':Ued. (Noee: Some assist.:lnce may be ;lvailable !n th~ offi~e of the .~dn C ounry Highway Distric~.) 8. A descriptlon of how the ap pI icane proposes che rig.hhl c""way to be vac.J.ted (i f other rhan one.h41f (~) to l!ach adjac::nr property OWner). Should division and rev~rsion be ocher chan one-half (!':) to each adjacent prop~rry o\Vn~r. applicant must provide fu II names and addresses v t" each Grantee. ilddress and zip code. togerher with a signed consent ~f each ndj~cent property owner. 9. ALL applica.nts are advised of Section 40-20:;. rdlho Code. which provides that. if [he Commissioners detemline chat J. highway parcel to be vacated and abandoned has a fair market value of 5:.500.00 or more. a charge may be imposed upon the acqu iring entity (applicJnt). no c in excess of ehe fair markee value of the parcel. :1S a condition of the vaccJtion and JbQ.ndonmenr. f f it is determined by ACHD st.ilff th<1c che value of the righ too f. way to be vllc::\ted will likely exceed S::UOOOO. ehe Jpplic.J.nt shall provide. wIth the applic:lcion and (Ie :<ppi icanr's e:-':p~r.se. .1 letter u f estim~ted value from J qUJliticd apprniser. ado county highway district 3 18 CC:Si J 7Th · cCiSe, ! Ccnc 837 : J-64~9 . Phc ne (208) .;~5 _;' ceO DEe 10 '98 12:13 2083876380 PAGE. 02 '. AI ( ..... UPOI'i RECEIPT OF THE APPL/CA nON FOR VACA IrON. THE STAfF OF THE ADA COL:NIY HIGHWA Y DISTRICT wrLL DO THE FOLLO\VING; . I. Conduct an on-sire inspection of the rigot>.., t:'wo:, sough t to be Y:lc:lred. . , . " , Place On Technic.1/ Review Commirte~ Jgenda tor $tJt'r' review. J. Staff will prepare recommendations tor presentation to Board of C<Jmmissioners of the AJa CuUntv Highway DiStrict. to S~t the time, date and place of public he.:lring. and provide Jpplic.1nc J copy of staff recommendacions to the BOilrd. A hearing dJte will be est:lb lished to .:onsider the petition for vacation and to t~e public tc:stimony. 4. A Notice of Public He:lring, cogether \II irh the legal descripcion <Jf the property will be published in the Idilho ScaresmJn Newspilper or applic~ble ne\vspJper. a) Published] times; : consecutive times. W:lit I week Jnd publ ish I time. last notice 7 to : I days prlor co public heJ.ting. b) The Notice will be posted at the Ada County Highway Oisrrict AdminiStrative Offices 30 days prior to hearing, 5. Notify ilffected public utilities. staff dep<!rrments and Oth~r <lgencies which may have In interest in th~ vacation applil::1ti\.ln to deeennine prescn t use and t'ururc pi llns for :he area 0 f vacation. inc IUding, but noe limited to preS~nt and flJntre bike and pedestrian pathways. CIty parks. future Jccess [0 and ITom propertieS. 6. Following acceptance of the application by the Board of Commissioners. staffwill notify by cerrified [erter property owners within 300 feet 0 f the portion of (he right...., f.way proposed to be v3c:u;:d (olt least] 0 days) prior co me date of rhe public hearing, (at I~csc.30 days) 8. Subsequene to the public he:uing, Findings of Faces and Conc lusions of Law will be approved by the Ad:! County Highway District Commissioners. At ,he time Flndmgs of Facts and Conclusions of Law are approved by . Ada CIJunry Highway District Commissioners J RESOLUTION. for Vacation and Abandonment will be presented to the Commissioners for signature. Recording of [he appropriate documents will be completed by the Highway District and appropriate distribution made to the applicant. ApplicJ.Ots are advised that :lpproved vacations and abandol1.rnencs of public right-of-way will be SUBJECT TO . RETENTION of public and private utility casements, drainage easements, irrigation ellSemenrs and other easements of record or not of record or in use upon Or under s:!td public righe-of-way, together with provisions for replacing or relocJting same. Costs :!SSoCiilted with relocation or rep lacemenr of existing facilities shall be borne by the app!ic;'\nt with approval of applicable utility or agenc;: The normal time required to prOCess iUl :lppl ication tor vJcation Is approximately 3-1 ~ weeks. C:' 0 tl'ice: 'wp\lr'l " W~C~lI on \proced'Jr. \'01: DEe 10 '98 12:13 2083876380 PAGE. 03 RECEIVED DEe 3 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN ~ ! i )l-- J : -<0 i--~IITIt::t~ -~_}~. /~::-t- . i - ---i ~~I\, Cr=- :.k(\ .~~.~..-\ : '_ .ij'F- +'. " / _h - rl ; \ ,- - i I ~--JI~\~---L _~__,} I ----1-- --I m _ -<- \' ~l b.~,"=='~:c=\ t-i!rr~E -in:;-, t: - --- L- ----: ---.- L ~~- j L__~ -", i i\ !-~Jtl1t:"J------2=:_~:- ! iF -~ -~ i l ;--- ..---- ~~---~ \ " \\ '--g--- -7---.------it\_ : . ~ I I j / i ~-_ ~- ---if u_J "~~~~ '~<---=-=--:-~=--.:-..:..=. j ~.;~. ~ -u_ : - -~'\.'- ~ -=~~ , - :~~ ' i: Ir~~~ )i -- --~ " ~, R! 1-----;- ---1------ u I .. \ I j I I I - == .:!--.::::.. -:- ~=_-::-.:.._==';... ____ _-=c - - -- ~~ -~- - -L-.,-.::.-=:: ~. .~~ __ rllll"'~~ ~ N . . t~LIN& - "lIT - ~'EE'v-- ._ -J. ~r- f'. ----~1 r~D. 1 . 1 I ~ I ----trir.---. " r-- ! II! I Iii I liP! r-- "-1i/'i} ! ~:" I d : I ;..---, rH-- - -.1 !. ,': . I i I ! - .. I ' : .j: il L W61lill' - ~ -:: ,...,,-r I. -~ ;~i;fr-i I : : Ii" (( I }I '~-'i -~jII!H I I' I 'Ii I ...-1 -L-LJ , \-1 I I JO) I - r-il I II II J I, It. -.J l :dJ I F_ ~___ 1 I ~ ----IT' I ! - - . - _J C41l.L: I I r _.- ; ELVlRA SUBDI\'ISION, P.U.O. VICINITY MAP NTS : i t2.(t4U,Cste-tI :~ti8dW~tt . Va,~tJOJ'l.:L. E. Wdsnlntltn ~~. (~()IWi;t}( Appn>x..1IJ.O') -.:> -:'-J ') ~) o -, J) .=:> ''-.1 ..../ -:z i : ,rQ j l. ~. (~ N \01 \ ~ ---, r<) (0) '--- z: o CD :;: o CO ::) rtJ ~ a: <::( CL W z: rt LU :r: r- <1: o (I) ..I" ~~ f5 <! z >- Q:: U o z u w ~" CL ~ -~ 0:: W iEr= tn ~ B~ tntn ~ ~ >- 0 <i (f) 3: 0 ~ 5 a::: o o ~ <( a.. o ('oJ \ ~ I L.J I L-l1 L.J ! <l I LL I <t I <( ::: i if) I > ~ 'J (j) v RECEIVED DEe 3 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN N w I to ~ -... ,.., b o z ~ <i ~ Z W o v; (OW I~ ct::>- -' 0~ zc{ zla... OW N(j Z (7j ....---... ~ ~, lU N >- ...... ~ ~ . I~ 0: *~ Cl. N a::.. ~ o~ N w (fJ ::> w z ~ ~ >- : I <.0 I-- ..q- <( ':q.. u ~I 8. ) " i i ~--1 ~ i :J ~j · ~~~ \U~'S t\qV) ---~--~------~ j ,OO'09t M uvL.9l.68 N ,ez - - T- -- ---.-J - L.. l .ZZ: L <:n j @, N, N Wl I I ~ I 0, N 0, i r')~) I N r ~ l - L -- ~_ _ _J -' ,ZZ; L en N =0,-- -/- - ----' r-'\ '- l .lZ I N i v ~ I rei en l{') r, N! "UU) - _1_" - -L._ ~ _J ~ <( > a:: 0.. - -- r- -" -J L~ l c" j 'f- ~' N1 ~ tO~) ! .Z;~ L '0> N J ~ iffi "8! -- -- L - -, " __ J L- __ -.-J clZ L ;" N .. - --1- -- -1 - 1-- I (Z; Z t C) ." --... " l N I oo~) ! (J) N ! (]) 8 I .lZl . - - ,-- -- -L _ -' J ~ I Q) &() ,9L o I() .------,.----------------- ----- ~--- ......._~-- ~" / c-V:J ' /' ",v ~ ....... 5 @r- e: t- o -..J inl r.o <0 I~ (}) ,~L l ~I it> (,0 N f:::\ /3nN3l\'f i- '0 co ...J 4: .......u z~ =>....... I N ... om ~5 OI g,~ ct:o 0..1- ~ a: ~ z: c wO o~ --:> t.D_ l-Q to[() <1::::> WW 3nN3,\ v lor 'b <0 ~ C> Z ~ c.n x w Ow '-z J-- o-J Wet: z~ B< ()~ (< , l~ ; ,~~l r u , ~ ,-- . \ \ j~' ~I \\, ~1 \" ,! ""'>. -- ~ _; L. _ _ . _ _f "" f ' / ) t .,' ~ -, > >1 - -1 I ',.~~'~ii _ '\ : I i:=-: -:':.:...-:-= :--:: ::::. '_::,,' -; ! : i ~~ ! I /J ~.__--___ ____ __ -' (_-~.,t ~_~ o.J ~j " 1- _..~ :r".. I ...... JI N I \.1 I i J01 ! -lr-" I I -/ 1 ij Iii I ! I i I ~t ~ ~.-. I I I -. -r--r-r ~I , ~; : ,Ii ; I L J I I ..J...-J q r.L--L- -1-----1__ --T-, I. ,-iT--1 I : i I j j ~ ~ III ' I I I I I . ~ 'I ; I .--I--~' l---L-~ ~-L.-L -:.- ~:c- _ :.;:;----i - ~;--jin~lm ,fCLC~Ti j : ''\~ / L4.-~ ~JL..._~ ~ i '\ ~ ' :~-L ~:I ill-::---n 'I T:;T-: -- ., I :-:~~__i1):;;J ;-lJd ~:&::~~~:: i ~t'; -':---;:r--r~-4 'I'--=~:' j-- - - y- . : r 11 I I I : '. r: ---iI' ~ ' ill . ~ " , -~ :tc'~ . :.-'::; :~ ~. t 1.: ..~;..:...;l ' .- k. +.~-~ ~i; ;~:~-~~ ~~;j EL VlRA. SUBDI\,'ISION. P.U.() VICINITY MAP NTS [l.<l4utste-J RCadw~l1 Va,~tJo)'l.:L t:. Wdsh,"~n (!Jr.. ( 30. Wi.tt x Appyox...1IJ.O') "', ~.::'j ,M' .;:~- : ?~~ "'., '.' ~ ~ ~: ~ ,~ ~ ~ '-.J ~ ~ ,.' ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~... ~ .S;' ~ ::~:".. ..-~.; ~:: ~ - ,.- :..:~ ~~tn .:~; :~if"C ~:~~~i - -~--~- - /l..: ~ -~ : -~ - ..:~! ~f~~: ...-~-_:- ~~1:: .L:! ~ "'- ....~ 'i'"'-" '/. r f ~.\ .; ~~-:j :'o"~ :~.~ ~;.' :'--' ---'.1-' :;;, '~~' 'c;", L: 1- '.~ ?C ".',;: ~"'- ,:c:~ 7/ "<--~"'~--:;"j~':,,-,:,~--.-: .";' :~ ~'~".-:, ,~-;:, ~.::':.--:.< .V ~~ jj;,.~~<:t;-,j~~ , ":';. ~." .': .:~ t , .'"..~'"~~~-- }i ~f ~~~ ;~~' "':.0 ;~:: :~:. ~;'1 ;::;:: ilL; ~l~;:-; '1 "1?~~: :~~':,:' :/}~~ !'" ~ f;~~ f} ,'. r~ Ht,,}j ,~;~ '..;:~: ~',:" :,: ~J; { n:'::~.., ',? :~ 0' ':-1- ;,",-'5 ;o'C li ~:~i;: (~ ,~t- %.._.,? ;, __ c- ::: >-i;,:; ;''::-'',:~ t; .'.', ."," ,'''' ~y ~:,/::: '.S-. >; j --..~~ o".>~ ',;:~/ ., '.', /< .>' c. :;2~:;:. !'~\~~*ftJM~. ~..,. ":'<~'A ~!~~~~ ;.: <(~'i-:: -""=c :~;.;:'::'~'... ":>..<.<'; ~', ~f;~'~' :~~r; i? '<; /,Y. ::~{':"">~ .;: '.:;-..~ \0" ",~" ...I,j;d. >.--.. , :~ I~ . !t~ ><--. ~ ~- }-<" ~~ 1 ~:; . ':' ,c._.... ,_, "'7 -, '';c · ~~=r r~ ~ It :~~~, i:W "~,, ; > ~~,," E! ~~~ ~g~\' 1~'{ ~_;;- ,e: <: ;_ J ~;;, ,~', i"~ &61 ~A.i f'~ t4~,:-'L l'"" la',", __ ,_ ,_ ;;:.' '-'n --,<,"".: :--:~ :"~: :,{,'. .>~--:: "t~:';'~',\:L~ :~f"".7.':;,'-::'~'f-' ':; ,~';:' ;'j ':. fi~ > \;:. ..:t.: ~~~ '-/:. :....,;)~-'" \ ,i;':': ;?6;:.:" .n,.<:-:i' ' --~ ~~0.~~~ i\:.:':'. :~!;,~:--~;.'.. :\~~~:~;::~! ~~-~,W f.) ! - ) z: -J ) 0 <( >- CD r= <{ z 3: ~ :>- w ~ ) 0 ...... Q (7j . , en COW ct: 0 ::) 10::: 0 " ,) Cf.) 0:::>- -.J 0 .) ~ (;~ ~ ~ a: z<( .,/ ~ zlL. <! CL Ow CL ill Nd "0 z ~ Vi N a: w llJ :z:. :r: (f) )- ::> <( 0 (/) ",. ~~ f5 4: z >- 0::' U o Z u W ~f' 0.. ~ -Z ~ W ~g tn ~ 5~ (f)l/) 'J Ol v w Q c:;{ U (f) o z <( --' ~ ~ ..~ n: ~, 0 W N >- ~ ~<( <r . I ~ > a:: OJ > ., - 0.. N Ct::. '--" O~ W N Z ~ <i ~ I~ --' >- : ja: I (,Q 10- .-- -.:t- <{ v 0 t01 J 0, j 0 Vi, .- ~~HlM ~v17 -- SO'LOr ~6t.~6B NJ / i ,rs r I /-', ('\J \0, \ --/ \ .....-, r-') (0) '-.-.- "" ,Q~ 1 (.u.-......\ I : \~- --" c.!J~ s: : --,.{.i · ~~q \.U~~ t)q\IJ ---- -- -- - - ------,---_._-~ I 1 ( N w a to ..... -,.. l"o") b o z ,az ,OO'09L M "vL.9l'.68 N ~ - r- -- --;: 9 '- 1 ,ZZl ,oz /"- ........ 1 . ~ z: L Cr> 1'0 ~w) I N I '-/ I - L __ _ _. l_ '__ _) en N -/- - -1 ~ L_ l .lZL I , ; ~~ i --- -- i V! ..L >:. I v /3ntG-\ V i o <0 m N en N -.J .q: I-U z~ =>...- I N .. ot:A ~~ g,~ lrO Q..f- ~I m L() ~\ N! ~/ 1 - - -- !_- - L~ :..- _T -1 -- -- r-- - en I N .-- -- .., -' ,,-. -, l <D ~W-'~ "=/ ,ll; l ~ en a5" ~').. N I '-.. i '- -- 1_ - ~ '_ _J~ ..J .lZL ~~ - --j- ..- -1.= -~- l .2;Zl N ; CO (w "; I I ',--/; ()') ~) . -- -- 1-. __ _~ \~/ _ J .. L-- _ ..1 OJ It) .lZL .9L (:) III ---- ---- ---- ---. -- ------- .......----...- /~r; / 4'-...J q.. ..- /-~ 5 {<(\) r- e: ',-Y ...- o -J f~ L l in 1O N (~~ 'OJ N ~ N 0> N ~I inl r.o .. to I~ en '"'ll) <D ~ a: <( ~z: wO a~ -> CD__ l--Q coO) <(::) WeD 30rm V iOI b <0 ~ <:..:> Z ~ (f) X W Ow r-z .......- o-J Wet: z~ z<i 8~ Mayor ROBERT D. CORRIE HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTMENT (208) 884-4264 Council Memhers CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE GLENN BEN11..EY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING DEPARTMENT (208) 887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT (208) 884-5533 January 12, 1999 Dee R. Lynn (D'Arlene Y. Stutzman) 1154 Cathy Lane Meridian, 10 83642 888-1928 RE: Vacation of Right of Way Dear Ms. Lynn The vacation of the right of way you have requested was discussed at the City Council meeting on Tuesday, January 5th, 1999. With input from the City Planning & Zoning Administrator and the City Attorney, the City Council decided that the issue had been brought to them before and it had been denied at that time. I am enclosing a copy of the minutes from the January 5th meeting for your use. If you need any other information on this issue, please contact Shari Stiles of the Planning & Zoning department and I or Bill Gigray of the City Attorney department. Sincerely JI~ William G. Berg, Jr. City Clerk Meridian City Council January 51 1999 Page 69 Bentley: I agree. Corrie: We need a motion to authorize to have the letter signed and... Rountree: I make a motion that Meridian City Council and mayor authorize the further editorial of the letter to the Bureau of Reclamation dated in response to their letter dated 12/17/98. Continue drafting be done by the city attorney and provide final document for signature by... Bentley: Response has to be in by the 15th. Rountree: January 11, 1999, for circulation and signature. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree and seconded by Mr. Bentley to approve the motion as stated. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All aye. Corrie: Request tor Darlene Stutzman regarding vacation ot public right-ot-way. That was denied once and needs to reapply I think. Shari do you want-Will go ahead and give your speech. Berg: I guess I had the privilege of being contacted by Darlene, which ever she goes by, as I know her as Ms. Stutzman and she said she needed to make a requirement from ACHD for this application. This was during the time that Shari was on her vacation and so I told her she needed to submit a letter to the City Council to get this on the agenda and I think Shari has further comments to the in-depth of the previous stories behind this situation. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and council, Ms. Stutzman did come in previously and request a vacation ot the right-ot-way at that time it was denied by council. As part ot the Sterling Creek Subdivision)staff had requested that they make that a pedestrian walkway, however, that requirement was removed by council, but it is a perfect walkway over to Five Mile Creek, although they did have access to Five Mile Creek in other areas. There currently exists an old railroad car, what is that, some kind of railroad car or something, it's there to stay I think. People use it now as a walkway. Washington would align almost perfectly with that existing bridge over the Five Mile Creek. Then across the Five Mile Creek is-it's not called a pedestrian walkway, it's a drainage lot that goes to Danbury's Subdivision, but there is access through two Danbury Subdivision in that area and the people in Danbury Fair have expressed concern that that be maintained as a pathway. I assured them that if the vacation was considered in Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 70 the future there would be another application and they would get the opportunity to testify at the public hearing. That's what she needs to do, she is going through the Ada County Highway District process apparently, I guess it's already been denied once, she would just have to start over as far as. .. Gigray: .1 represent a highway district, so I'm somewhat familiar with street vacations and issues regarding cities. I know that you have a county wide highway district over here. When I saw this, it posed an-it's the first one of these that I've seen but I do think one of the issues here that we may want to think about is how we process any kind of application for street vacations. Ada County Highway District is the one that has jurisdictional authority to do it, but they can't do it without the approval of the city. In my view the best policy on these would be that the city not entertain such action unless they file the petition with the Ada County Highway District, they've noticed all of the hearings, then we could hear it as part of that process and make our comments and decision as part of a filed petition. My concern would be that someone files a petition, you take an action, say yeah, we approve this, if you do, for how long? What's it subject to? What are the conditions? Where is the staff reports? It seems to me if they file a legitimate petition to vacate a property then there is some legal process in place and then we could deal with that as an (Inaudible). As I saw this, it didn't look like-has she applied? Stiles: Previously she had. Gigray: It's been denied? Stiles: Yes. Gigray: I think... Rountree: That's the way the record sits at this point. So until she goes back through ACHD we are done with her. Gigray: Yeah, because I think otherwise you would be entertaining these things all the time. They would come in here and want to get a read from you-will you approve this, then 1'(1 go over to ACHD to make my petition. I think that is where they ought to go and then you can take a look at, get the staff reports that you need and then take action on whether you would approve it or not. Corrie: Send her back. Okay, anyone want to handle these two resolutions tonight? Bird: Which ones? Corrie: Resolution 172 and 208 changing the-well, let's we've got one for empowering the city treasurer to make investments. That's superceding resolution 208. We have in MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5. 1999 o APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 2 REQUEST: BID RESULTS FOR GOVERNMENT UTiliTIES BilliNG SYSTEM AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: tuff bt~ ~~ ItLvJ P JIl [it 5 (0 {1J CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: i)1!iJUf1.dl'rnV k~ ~7!7Iin.. .f!tcuuc;r1-'- IX J-e ~tm.ce, fo fuesh~ All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. .J I-W'oI t14 "'::J"::J l::R::1;.j 1 t- t< ~! J Y U- JTJCt< J .LJ .1 HI"i ~ tjtj' ( ~l~ J U WH l CK J..,ICt-' I .......~l/l1d .. . ' BAlUKOFF LINDSTROM lit: Co., P.A. Certifted PubJk: Accountmts CITY OF l\fERIDIAN GOVERNMENT UTD..JTIES BILLING SYSTEM 12/14/98 RECEIVED JAN - 2 1999 CITY OF I'dERIDJAN 877 West MaIn Street Suite 80S BoiH, Idaho 83702 1208) 344-1150 FAX: UDa) 344-7435 Dear CoUrtC11 Members: The City of Meridian advertised a bid {or the purchase of a government utility billing software system. Three software Valdors responded to the invitation; Caselle, INC out of Utah, The Springbrook Software CO out of Oregon and Sensus Softecb. INe out ofTcxss. I am recommending Casclle. INe 85 the vendor of choice. The tbrcc software packages are very similar in features and future upgradability. Sensus Softech, bowever~ requires a separate database package. Microsoft SQL Server. This database package should only be used when there is a systems admin~strator on staff to maintain it. The City of Meridian does not c~t1y have a systems administrator. Thus, 1 recommend that Sensus Softecb be removed from C~~~~~ . Appendix A is a price comparison of the three software packages. Casene's estimate is approximately $24.000 lcss than Sprlngbrook.s. CastIle bas several installations throughout Jdaho, Utah and the Northwest. I am recommending Caselle over Springbrook because ofthc price difference and because Caselle has such I strong presence in neighboring cities. including Garden City and throughout our state. Caselle is well known in our area and canies a good reputation. It is reasonable to believe that a strong . presence of a software company is advantageous for all users. Please note that in addition to the cost of 8O~ installation and training there Wlll be a need to plWCbase and configure up to 15 personal computers (PC's). Sincerely. ~~ Steve Konkol Accounting Systems Consultant J~ 04 -99 0EI:31 FR CITY 0= MERIDiAN .. ~ t::1tf( 481.$ I U Wf-ll t:.t< ~ I ....-.~/02 RECEIVED JAN - 2 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN Appendix A - Price Comparison Pl'iclng Comparison: Software: Utility Billing Software (IS User) Electronic Read Jnterface Cash Receipting Postal Reading Sofuvare Postal Scanning ~vice Database Software: Database So:fhvare Estimated Jmplemcotatlon: ImplementationlSet-Up Data COD'VCI"Sion Training (8 People): Training Fees Training Location TraveI~ Lodging, Meals, Transportation SupPort: 1 at Y car Support Total CaseUe, Inc. SeDS1IS Softech Springbrook s , 7,000 $ 17,000 $ 3O:tOOO $ 2,000 S 1.000 Included $ 4,000 S 7,500 Included S 3,000 5; 3,000 $ 3JOOO S 1,650 $ 1,650 $ 1,650 4,O~ s,8soL $ lncluded $ I Included I s [ S 11,000,. $ ~::I : 9.0001 5,100 $ 7,000 $ 10,000 Incl. with Impl. Spanish Fork, UT Portland, OR On Site I S 6,000 $ 6,000 $ 5,000 s 1,4501 $ 5,5951 $ 4)so01 s 43,1001 s 67.S9SL $ 62.2501 ** TOTt=l.. ,PAGE. 02 ** ( Answers to last Council meeting concerning Billing System up-grade. 1. Training costs: On-site training costs were included in the Sensus and Springbrook bids but not in the Caselle bid. This made the Caselle bid artificially low. In order to fairly compare the bids, we added in the expenses the City would incur to send personnel to be trained at Case lie's Utah facility. The figure may have been somewhat high but was intended to help in evaluating which bid is actually low. 2. Caselle is capable of and will train on-site if requested. This cost is $1000.00 per day plus travel. Caselle prefers and recommends off-site training to remove the day-to-day distractions experienced in on-site training. 3. Computer numbers: The bid specs required fifteen users as a bid mark. We currently have ten stations and will probably need more in the future. We therefore chose fifteen. This does not mean fifteen computers will be needed. We will only buy the number required to support our current needs. They must be Y2K compliant and Windows compatible. We will also have the ability to add future users beyond 15 if our needs so require. RECEIVED JAN -2 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN y~, v.., ......... .&.Y."" ,...~ .vv .,..... ,..vv ( To: John Shawcroft From: Steve Konkol Training at Casetle 3 Days Training Lodging Is 8PPx 50 to 55 per night. Person 1 Person 2 Person 3 Total Training Fee $ 1,500 S 1,125 $ 1.125 S 3,750 Travel LodgIng Meals Car Rental On Site Training $1.000 per day plus travel 't6IVV"; [' i RECEIVED JAN - 2 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) OF RAY ROBNETT, 3036 LANARK STREET,) FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ZONING OF .96 ACRES FOR OLSON BUSH ) DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING INDUSTRIAL PARK, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION ) AND ZONING The above entitled annexation and zoning application having come on for public hearing on December 15, 1998, at the hour of7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant, Ray Robnett, having appeared and testified and no one having testified in opposition and the City Council 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 December 15, 1998, 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 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 1 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT public service announcements; and the matter having been duly considered by the Ccity Council at the December 15, 1998, 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 ~9 67-6509 and 67-6511 , and SS 11-2-416E and 11-2-417 A, 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 m~ps 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. 4. The property which is the subject to the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this reference is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The property is approximately .96 acres in size. The property is located at 3036 Lanark Street, Meridian, Idaho. 5. The Applicant is acting on behalf of an authorization by the record owner of the property Mark Nelson of 244 Constitution Way, Idaho Falls, and has filed a written request for annexation and zoning. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 2 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT ( 6. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as Limited Industrial (M-I), and contains a newly constructed commercial building. 7. The Applicant requests the property be zoned (I-L), Light Industrial. 8. The Applicant has requested the annexation and this zoning, and the application was not initiated at the request of the City of Meridian. 9. The property is located at 3036 Lanark Street, Meridian, Idaho. 1 O. The proposed site of the subject property is north of Franklin Road and east of Eagle Road. The Union Pacific Railroad runs adjacent to the northern border of the property site. 11. The city limits of the City of Meridian are adjacent and abut on the east and north sides of the subject real property. 12. The land within the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present city limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 13. The property which is the subject of this application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian. 14. The entire parcel of the property is included within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 15. The applicant proposes to develop the subject property as an office/warehouse. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 3 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 16. 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: Adopt the Planning and Zoning Administrator and Assistant City Engineer Recommendations as follows: 16.1 The City of Meridian owns and maintains a water main in Lanark Street adjacent to the subject site. At this time sewer service is not available; however, the Van Auker sewer extension will provide service to the site via Lanark Street. 16.2 The applicant received approval of a conditional use permit by Ada County to construct an 8,OOO-square-foot office/warehouse for Wheel City, Inc. A minimum 35-foot front setback is required in the I-L zone. That plans be provided to the City even though Ada County may have already issued a building permit. 16.3 All construction shall meet the all Codes applicable to commercial property which have been adopted by the City. Construction needs to meet ADA requirements for handicap accessibility. 16.4 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. All parking areas are to be paved. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-2-414D4 and 11-2-414D5 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 16.5 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557, 10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 16.6 A minimum of one (1) three-inch (311) caliper tree per 1 ,500 square feet of asphalt as required per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414D. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 4 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 16.7 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed as not to direct illumination on any nearby residential areas or cause glare, in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-41403. 16.8 If none are existing, five-foot-wide sidewalks shall be installed along the Lanark Street frontage and within the property in accordance with City Ordinance 11-9-606B. 16.9 Provide screened trash enclosure per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414A3. Coordinate dumpster site locations with the City's solid waste contractor, Sanitary Services, Inc. Locate dumpsters so as not to impede fire access. 16.10 No signage has been proposed, and none is approved with this application. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2- 415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall be subject to design review. No temporary, A-frame or flashing signage will be permitted. Non-conforming signage will be removed by the City upon 3 days' notice to the applicant. 16.11 All outdoor storage of equipment and materials shall be screened from view. 16.12 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing or adjacent to the property shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605M. The Evans Drain is located within a 55' easement across the northern portion of the property. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. No variances have been requested fortiling of any ditches crossing this project. This condition shall not apply if the Developer can establish to the satisfaction of the Public Work's Director that the subject ditch is a natural body of water under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Developer provides an engineering study that establishes that the tile size required is 48" or greater or posts a sufficient bond for future tiling. 16.13 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7- 517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 16.14 Detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant for any improvements upon the subject real property to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 5 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 16.15 City Council is to approve all water hookup while the Applicant proceeds with annexation and zoning. 17. It is found that if the developer pays for the requested improvements and complies with the conditions set forth in these findings of fact no. 16, and all subparts, the economic welfare of the City and its residents and tax and rate payers will be protected, which requirement shall be included in a development agreement, a condition of annexation and zoning designation. 18. It is found that the following are development considerations which must be taken into account, in order to assure the proposed development is designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner which is harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing, or intended character of the general vicinity, in order to assure that the proposed use will not change the essential character of the affected vicinity and will insure that the proposed uses will not be hazardous or disturbing to the existing, or future neighboring uses, particularly considering the impact of proposed development on potential to produce excessive traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare and odors: 18.1 A minimum 35-foot front setback is required in the I-L zone. 18.2 A minimum of one (1) three-inch (3") caliper tree per 1 ,500 square feet of asphalt as required. 18.3 Five-foot-wide sidewalks to be installed along the Lanark Street frontage and within the property. 18.4 All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 111- 2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall be subject to design review. No temporary, A-frame or flashing signage will be permitted. These conditions shall be in addition to the requirements of Meridian's signage ordinance. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 6 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT (- 19. The applicant requested zoning of the subject real property as Light Industrial (I-L) is consistent with the commercial designation on the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which designates the subject property as commercial. 20. The proposed development will serve existing and growing needs and will provide services to surrounding institutional, commercial and residential development. 21. The development of the property as a (I-L) Light Industrial, as requested by the Applicant, will be compatible to the development in the surrounding area subject to the conditions of development herein found to be reasonable in relation to the requested zone (I-L) Light Industrial District and is accordance with the adoptive Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian. 22. There are no major or scenic features of major importance that affect the consideration of this application. 23. The subject annexation request and zoning designation and proposed development relates to the goals and policies of the Comprehensive plan of the City as follows: 23.1 The consideration of the provisions of the Comprehensive plan and the requirements of the Zoning ordinance assure that the processing of such application is the management of growth with the aim to achieve high-quality development. Enhancement of Meridian's quality of life for all residents is achieved by applying the criteria of the Comprehensive plan and the Zoning ordinances of the City to all applications such as the subject application. 23.2 This proposed new growth development will finance public service expansion by the requirement herein that the applicant comply with the requests submitted of the political subdivisions responses within the Meridian Urban Service Planning Area submitted in the record of this matter. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 7 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 23.3 The expansion of commercial development is facilitated by the granting of this application subject to the conditions herein set forth. 23.4 The application is consistent with Meridian's self identity. 23.5 The proposed development will be consistent with the goal of supplying employment and economic self-sufficiency for the existing and future residents of the City and the reduction of the reliance upon Boise and the strengthening of the City's ability to finance and implement public improvements, services and its open space character. 23.6 The preservation and improvement of the character and quality of Meridian's man-made environment while maintaining its identity as a self-sufficient community is achieved by applying the criteria of the Comprehensive plan and the Zoning ordinances of the City to the subject application. 23.7 Compliance with the requests of the Political subdivisions providing services, assures that community services are being provided for existing and projected needs and that the land use patterns of the City are balanced to insure that revenues pay for services and that the Urban Service Planning Area is visually attractive, efficiently managed and clearly identifiable. 23.8 Compatible and efficient use of land through innovative and functional site design is achieved by applying the criteria of the Comprehensive plan and the Zoning ordinances of the City to the subject application. 24. The property can be physically serviced with City water and sewer, if applicant extends the lines. 25. Meridian has, and is, experiencing a population increase; that there are pressures on land previously used for agricultural uses to be developed into commercial uses and other uses. 26. This application is for annexation and zoning of Lot 4, Block 1 of the existing Olson Bush Industrial Park Subdivision. The legal description for annexation included in the application appears to describe the subject site; however it is not tied to recognized FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 8 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT government corners as required by the State Tax Commission. Applicant shall submit a revised legal description that references the recognized government corners. The legal description shall be prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor, Licensed by the State of Idaho, and shall conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158. The legal description for annexation must place this parcel contiguous to the Corporate City Limits per Ordinance No. 686. 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 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 Commission 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 "Local 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. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 9 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 4. The following are found to be pertinent provisions of the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan and are applicable to this Application: 1 . The Goals of the Comprehensive Plan are set forth at Page 5 and include: 1.1 To preserve Meridian's environmental quality and to make provisions for and improve the total natural environment by adopting City-wide and Urban Service Planning Area policies, which deal with area-specific policies and programs. 1.2 To ensure that growth and development occur in an orderly fashion in accordance with adopted policies and procedures governing the use of land, residential development the provision of services and the distribution of new housing units within the Urban Service Planning Area. 1.3 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. 1.4 To provide housing opportunities for all economic groups within the community. 1.5 To preserve and improve the character and quality of Meridian's man-made environment while maintaining its identity as a self- sufficient community. 1.6 To encourage cultural educational and recreational facilities which will fill the needs and preferences of the citizens of Meridian and to insure that these facilities are available to all residents of the City. 1.7 To provide community services to fit existing and projected needs. 1.8 To establish compatible and efficient use of land through the use of innovative and functional site design. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 10 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 1.9 To encourage a balance of land use patterns to insure that revenues pay for services. 1.10 To create an Urban Service Planning Area which is visually attractive, efficiently managed and clearly identifiable. 2. Under ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS at page 17 Retail, commercial and office development are frequent partners within Commercial Activity Centers. In order to support residential and industrial developments, areas should be set aside as Commercial Activity Centers and their development carefully guided. Various commercial activity centers are designated on the generalized land use map. Planning policies pertaining to commercial activity centers are presented in the land use chapter of the plan. MIXED-PLANNED USE DEVELOPMENT AREAS at page 17 Mixed use is a planning category which refers to the coordinated development of several major uses as part of a single project, such as specialty retail/commercial, variable density residential, offices, motels, industrial, service, commercial, and public and semi-public uses. Certain areas have been designated for mixed-planned uses. The development of mixed and planned compatible land uses should be carefully guided through specific project plans, in accordance with the mixed-use policies contained in the Land Use chapter of the Plan. Economic Development Goal Statement Policies, Page 18 1 .1 The City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and 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 interests and activities are to dominate. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 11 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 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. 1.5 Strip industrial and commercial uses are not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 1.6 It is the policy of the City of Meridian to support shopping facilities which are effectively integrated into new or existing residential areas, and plan for new shopping centers as growth and development warrant. (Emphasis added.) 3. Under LAND USE EXISTING CONDITIONS, Page 21 Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, and include small commercial center and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. Area of Impact, Page 22 Comprehensive Plan Map The proposed future land use delineation's for the impact area are shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map - Generalized Land Uses, . . . The land use element is based upon these objectives: 4. Planned mixed uses along 1-84, Franklin Road, U.P. Railroad, and Fairview Avenue corridors. (Emphasis added.) COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY CENTERS Page 25 In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and developments standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: 1. Traffic Volume and Type 2. Trip Generation FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 12 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING I OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 3. Impacts on Arterial Street System 4. Proximity to Other Commercial Development 5. Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas 6. Accessibility of Site 7. Parking Demands 8. Pedestrian Circulation 9. Available Utility Systems 10. Aesthetics (Design Considerations) 11. Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses 12. I nternal Circulation Design 13. Drainage COMMERCIAL POLICIES, Page 26 4.6U Community shopping centers will be encouraged to locate at arterial intersections and near high-traffic intensity areas. (Emphasis added.) 4. Under TRANSPORTATION, Page 43 Existing Conditions a. Eagle Road, North of Overland, is listed as a principal arterial 5. Under COMMUNITY DESIGN, at Page 71 Community Identification Goal Statement Create visual quality and functional identity for the City of Meridian and its surrounding environment. Policies 1.1 All commercial and industrial developments should be reviewed by the City for adequate site planning. 1.3 Open space areas within all development should be encouraged. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 13 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 1.4 Major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Unattractive land uses along these entrances should be screened from view. Special Community Design Areas Goal Statement 2.1 U Require businesses and government to install and maintain landscaping. 2.2U 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. Entryway Corridors Entryway corridors are arterial roadways entering the community that introduce both visitors and residents to Meridian. City- designated gateway arterials include the following streets: p. Eagle Road (North and South entrances) Entryway corridors are a community's front door. It is acknowledged that the corridor's trees (or lack thereof), commercial signage, and site character provide t.he first, and often times the most lasting, impression of the entire community. Therefore, the entire community and, most specifically its governing bodies, have the right and the responsibility to guide the development and redevelopment that occurs along entryway corridors. Entrance Corridors Goal Statement Promote, encourage, develop and maintain aesthetically- pleasing entrances to the City of Meridian. Policies FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 14 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 4.2U Support ACHD corridor development standards for the entryways to the City. 4.3U Use the Comprehensive Plan, subdivision regulations, and zoning to discourage strip development and encourage clustered, landscaped business or residential development on entrance corridors. 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. Quality of Environment Goal Statement Policies 5.2U Ensure that all new development enhances rather than detracts from the visual quality of its surroundings, especially in areas of prominent visibility. 5. The requested zoning of Light Industrial, (I-L) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. 14. as follows: (I-L) Light Industrial: The purpose of the (I-L) Light Industrial District is to provide for light industrial development and opportunities for employment of Meridian citizens and area residents and reduce the need to commute to neighboring cities; to encourage the development of manufacturing and wholesale establishments which are clean, quiet and free of hazardous or objectionable elements, such as noise, odor, dust, smoke or glare and that are operated entirely or almost entirely within enclosed structures; to delineate areas best suited for industrial development because of location, topography, existing facilities and relationship to other land uses. This district must also be in such proximity to insure connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of Meridian. Uses incompatible with light industry are not permitted, and strip development is prohibited. 6. That Section 11-2-409, ZONING SCHEDULE OF USE CONTROL, B, Commercial, lists commercial uses allowed in the various zoning districts of the City; that FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 15 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT office/warehouses are listed as permitted for offices and warehouses as conditional uses in the Light Industrial (I-L) District. 7. That the City of Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under LAND USE, Mixed-Use Area at Eagle Road, in 5.16U, states that all development requests will be subject to development review and conditional use permit processing to insure neighborhood compatibility. 8. By authority of the City of Meridian under the Comprehensive Plan, a conditional use permit is required for Applicant to construct and operate any stores or facilities on this parcel of land. 9. Since the annexation and zoning of land is a legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions upon the annexation of land. See Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105 Idaho 65, 665 P2d 1075 (1983). 10. The development of the annexed land, if annexed, shall meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian including, but not limited to: Section 11-9-616 which pertains to development time schedules and requirements; Section 11-9-605 M, which pertains to the piping of ditches; and Section 11-9-606 B 14., which pertains to pressurized irrigation systems. 11. The development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Zoning and Subdivision and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian. 12. Section 11-2-417 D of the Zoning and Development Ordinance provides in part as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 16 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT If property is annexed and zoned, the City may require or permit, as a condition of the zoning, that an owner or developer make a written commitment concerning the use or development of the subject property. If a commitment is required or permitted, it shall be recorded in the office of the Ada County Recorder and shall take effect upon the adoption of the ordinance annexing and zoning the property, or prior if agreed to by the owner of the parcel. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 17 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT ( 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. This application is for annexation and zoning of Lot 4, Block 1 of the existing Olson Bush Industrial Park Subdivision. The legal description for annexation included in the application appears to describe the subject site; however it is not tied to recognized government corners as required by the State Tax Commission. Applicant shall submit a revised legal description that references the recognized government corners. The legal description shall be prepared by a Registered Land Surveyor, Licensed by the State of Idaho, and shall conform to all the provisions of the City of Meridian Resolution No. 158. The legal description for annexation must place this parcel contiguous to the Corporate City Limits per Ordinance No. 686. 2. That the City Attorney shall prepare for consideration by the City Council the appropriate ordinance for the annexation and zoning designation. (I-L) Light Industrial Ordinance shall not be finally approved by the City Council until provisions of parts 1 and 3 of this order have been met; and 3. Detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant for any improvements upon the subject real property to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and which plans shall comply with the following: 3.1 The City of Meridian owns and maintains a water main in Lanark Street adjacent to the subject site. At this time sewer service is not available; however, the Van Auker sewer extension will provide service to the site via Lanark Street. 3.2 The applicant received approval of a conditional use permit by Ada County to construct an 8,OOO-square-foot office/warehouse for Wheel City, Inc. A minimum 35-foot front setback is required in the I-L zone. Staff is uncertain if all City Ordinances are being met and requests that plans be provided to the City even though Ada County may have already issued a building permit. 3.3 All construction shall meet the all Codes applicable to commercial property which have been adopted by the City. Construction needs to meet ADA requirements for handicap accessibility. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 18 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT 3.4 Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 11-2-414 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. All parking areas are to be paved. Paving and striping shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Sections 11-2-41404 and 11-2-414D5 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance and in accordance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. 3.5 A drainage plan designed by a State of Idaho licensed architect or engineer is required and shall be submitted to the City Engineer (Ord. 557,10-1-91) for all off-street parking areas. All site drainage shall be contained and disposed of on-site. 3.6 A minimum of one (1) three-inch (311) caliper tree per 1 ,500 square feet of asphalt as required per City Ordinance Section 11-2-4140. 3.7 Outside lighting shall be designed and placed as not to direct illumination on any nearby resident!al areas or cause glare, in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-2-41403. 3.8 If none are existing, five-foot-wide sidewalks shall be installed along the Lanark Street frontage and within the property in accordance with City Ordinance 11-9-6068. 3.9 Provide screened trash enclosure per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414A3. Coordinate dumpster site locations with the City's solid waste contractor, Sanitary Services, Inc. Locate dumpsters so as not to impede fire access. 3.10 No signage has been proposed, and none is approved with this application. All signage shall be in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall be subject to design review. No temporary, A-frame or flashing signage will be permitted. Non-conforming signage will be removed by the City upon 3 days' notice to the applicant. 3.11 All outdoor storage of equipment and materials shall be screened from view. 3.12 Any exisitng irrigation/drainage ditches crossing or adjacent to the property shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605M. The Evans Drain is located within a 55' easement across the northern portion of the property. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 19 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT ( Public Works Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. This condition shall not apply if the Developer can establish to the satisfaction of the Public Work's Director that the subject ditch is a natural body of water under the jurisdication of the U.S. Army Core of Engineers or the Developer posts a sufficient bond for future tiling. 3.13 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used fro non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3.14 A development agreement should be required as a condition of annexation. If applicant complies with all City requirements, such an agreement may not be needed. 3.15 City Council approve water hookup while the Applicant proceeds with annexation and zoning. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 20 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the 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 January 5, 1999. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON VOTED COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED COUNCILMAN GLENN BENTLEY MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) MOTION: ~ APPROVED~ DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public Works Department. Dated: 1-- Ii --Cj/j msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Findings3\Annexation and Zoning FF\OLSON BUSH INDUST PARK FF FOR CC AZ.doc FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - J/f.'ZI AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION & ZONING / OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK RAY ROBNETT RECEIVED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF lVIERIDIAN BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN THE MATfER OF THE REQUEST ) FOR PRELIMINARY PlAT OF ) APPROXIMATELY 4.296 ACRES FOR ) PROPOSED SCOTfSDALE ) SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE ) COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC- ) SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANI<LIN ROAD ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF lAW AND ORDER OF CONDI- TIONALAPPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PlAT The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on the 5th day of January, 1999, and appearing at the hearing on behalf of the applicant was Mr. Van Elg of Briggs Engineering, Inc., and the City Council having received a report from Shari Stiles, the Planning and Zoning Administrator, and the City Council having received as part of the record of this matter the recommendation to City Council of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the applicant having submitted the latest Preliminary Plat Drawing dated: December 12, 1998, of the Preliminary Plat of Scottsdale Subdivision by Briggs Engineering, Inc., submitted for preliminary plat approval and which preliminary plat for approval application is herein received and adjudged by the City Council pursuant to Section 11-9-604, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. Therefore the City Council mal,es the following findings: FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL EN.TERPRlSES.,- LLC. SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION - 1 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan by reason of the fact that it lies within the existing Urban Area as defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map, Infrastructure Planning Analysis Comprehensive Plan and Map, adopted December 21, 1993 and, the property is presently zoned R-1S, Medium High Density . Residential District, the City Council having approved the applicant's application for a Re-zone of the subject property to (L-O) Limited Office District, and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System. [see Section 11-2-40'8B(7), Municipal Code of the City of Meridian.] 2. The preliminary plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629. 3. It is determined that Urban SelVices can be made available to accommodate the proposed development if the plat complies with the requirements and conditions hereinafter set forth as conditions of preliminary plat approval. 4. The proposed development is a continuity of the proposed development within the City's Capital Improvement Program and if the conditions which are requested by the ACHD and as proposed by the developer as stated on the preliminary plat there will be public financial capability of supporting services for the FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC SCO'ITSDALE SUBDIVISION - 2 proposed development. 5. The development if built in accordance with the conditions and as proposed, will not create health, safety or environmental problems and there have been no specifics of any such concerns brought to the Council's attention. 6. It is found that the recommendation to City Councilor the Planning and Zoning Commission is reasonable and appropriate for the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat with a modification of the condition 1.15 as hereinafter set forth. 7. The applicant has submitted for consideration of this approval an updated drawing of the preliminary plat herein designated as: "December 12, 1998, of the Preliminary Plat of Scottsdale Subdivision by Briggs Engineering, Inc." DECISION AND ORDER Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Section 1 1-9- 604E of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND THIS DOES ORDER the Preliminary Plat of the applicant as evidenced by December 12, 1998, of the Preliminary Plat of Scottsdale Subdivision by Briggs Engineering, Inc. hereby conditionally approved with the conditions of approval as follows to-wit: 1.1 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9- FINDINGS ANn ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC SCOTISDALE SUBDIVISION - 3 ( 605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Worles Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 1.2 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7 -517 . Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigationa 1 a3 Determine the normal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with street development plans. 1 a4 Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for review by the Meridian City AttomeYa 1 a5 Provide 5' wide sidewall<s in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.Ba 1.6 Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. Mal,e any corrections necessary to conform. 1.7 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water W orl(S Superintendenta 1 a 8 Indicate on the final plat map any FEMA Flood Plains affecting the area being platted, and detail plans for reducing or eliminating the boundary. 1.9 Sanitary sewer service to this site will be via the existing main that traverses through the adjacent development. 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 l,eep the sewer lines on the south FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION - 4 and west sides of the centerline. 1.1 0 Water service to this site will be via 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 W orl(S Department. 1.11 Indicate the existing Eight Mile Lateral easement, as well as any other ditch easements, on the preliminary plat map. 1.12 Two-hundred-fifty-watt, high-pressure sodium streetlights will be required at locations designated by the Public W orl(5 Department. All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. 1.13 Applicant must indicate whether the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association or the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. If the system is to be private, plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public W orlcs Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system O&M manual must be submitted prior to plan approval. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be supplied by a year round source of water. If a creel, or well source is not available, a single point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer. 1.14 Applicant to redesign the drainage seepage bed to comply with Meridian City Ordinance in accordance with recommendations and/or suggestions of Assistant City Engineer Brucl, Frecl<.eton on December 8, 1998. Specifically to redesign the drainage seepage bed instead of in a common lot to gain 20 feet. Blanlcet easements are to be granted to the Ada County Highway District FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL EN.TERPRIS.ES1" LLC SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION - 5 for heavy maintenance of storm drainage facilities, and the City of Meridian for operation and maintenance of the sewer main. 1.15 Developer to install a 1 Q-foot-wide planting strip and the individual owners of each lot are required to have an added 1 0- feet, for a total of a 20-foot-wide planting strip buffer between the office use and the residential use. Graphically depict the landscape setbacl, on the plat. Provide a detailed landscape plan for review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Administrator or designee prior to signature on the final plat. Construction of the entire landscape buffer could be required prior to obtaining building permits or at the time each individual lot is developed, at the option of the P&Z Commission and Council. However, if individual lot; owners are responsible for construction, the approved plan needs to be fully communicated to ensure consistency of construction. 1.16 Provide fencing adjacent to the residential use where none currently exists. Fencing to be installed prior to obtaining building permits. 1.1 7 The building footprints and parldng layouts shown on the plat are conceptual only and are not reviewed or approved as part of this application. 1.18 The setbacl, on Franldin Road is a minimum 25 feet. As Franldin Road is an entrance corridor to the City, this area will needed to be maintained and designated as a landscape area. 1.1 9 Add a note that direct access to Franldin Road from Lot 1, Blocl, 1, is prohibited. Adopt the Central District Health Department Recommendations as follows: 1.20 The Applicant obtain written approval for the central sewage and central water prior to approval of the conditional rezone. 1.21 The Applicant's central sewage and central water plants must be FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PIAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL_ENTERPRISES.~._LLC. SCOTISDALE SUBDIVISION - 6 submitted to and -approved by the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. la22 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problema 1a23 Stormwater must be pre-treated through a grassy swell prior to the discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. Adopt the Meridian Fire Department Recommendations as follows: 1.24 All fire codes for the proposed project will need to be met. Adopt the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District Requirements as follows: 1.25 The Developer must contact the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District for approval before any encroachment or change of right- of-way occurs. 1.26 A Land Use Change Cite Development Application must be filed for review prior to final platting. 1.27 All laterals and wasteways must be protected. 1.28 All municipal surface drainage must be retained on cite. 1.29 If any drainage leaves the cite, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage plans. 1.30 The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 9 31-3805. 1.31 It is recommended that irrigation water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. Adopt the Ada County Highway District's Recommendation as follows: 1.32 The proposed 3.78 cite should accommodate less than 30,000 square feet of office space. FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION - 7 APPROVAL OF THE FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT The Meridian City Council adopts and approves the Findings and Order of Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED MAYOR CORRIE (TIE B~<ER) VOTED MOTION: APPROVED~DISAPPROVED: Z:\Govemmental Municipal\ W ork\M\Meridian 15360 M\ScottsdalePrePlatCC. FCS RECEI:VED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRIS-ES-~ LLC. SCOTISDALE SUBDIVISION - 8 ( BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICI<EY, FOR A VARIANCE FOR LESS THAN 65 FOOT MINIMUM STREET FRONTAGE ON SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN AN R-8 ZONE, FOR OLIASON PARI( SUBDIVISION, EAST OF 603 E. PINE, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A V ARlANCE The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on the 15th day of December, 1998, and the City Council having received the transmittal to agencies and having received the variance application, having heard the testimony presented, being fully advised in the premises does hereby mal(e the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision, as follows to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivisions and Development Ordinances codified at Title 11 Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 1 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE Meridian adopted December 21, 1993 Ordinance #629 - January 4, 1994 and Maps. 2. The requirements of Idaho Code SS 67-6509, 6516 and SS 11-2-416 E and 419 D as evidenced in the record of this matter. 3. The Applicant is Virginia Jennison Family Trust whose address is 2090 S. Cole Road, Boise, Idaho 83709. The location of the subject property is the West 333.5 feet of Lot 1, of the Onwiley Subdivision, Ada County, Idaho. 4. The legal description of the property appertains to the real property that is included within the conditionally approved Preliminary Plat of Oliason Park Subdivision as appears in the record of proceeds of this matter. 5. The present land use of subject property is presently zoned by Ada County as Rural Estate (R-l), and contains an existing home on Lot 1. 6. The proposed land use of subject property is to develop the subject property in the following manner: Construct an eleven (11) lot residential subdivision with a shared drive-way on Pine Avenue for Lots 2 through 4. The Applicant also proposes to extend Idaho Street. 7. The present zoning district of subject property is (R-l) Rural Estate. The proposed site of the subject property is east of 5th Street and north of the Union Pacific Railroad. Pine Avenue runs adjacent to the northern border of the property VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 2 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUB DIVIS I ON/FIND INGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE site. 8. That a vicinity lnap of the proposed scale approved by the City Council showing property lines, existing streets, proposed district and such other items as required have been furnished. 9. That a schematic drawing, of which is attached to these findings marl(ed Exhibit "A" has been supplied. 10. The Applicant requests a variance of the provisions of Section 11-2-41 O(A) of the Zoning Schedule of Bull, and Coverage Controls for an R-8 Zone which requires 65' to the footage as shown on "Preliminary Plat of Oliason Parl( Subdivision", J.J. Howard Engineering/Surveying dated 8/12/98, Drawing No. 311-07-240-000. 11. J~m Howard ofJ.J. Howard Engineering testified representing the Applicant and no one testified in opposition to the request. 12. The existence of special circumstances or conditions affecting the property are: 12.1 The subject property is an in-fill and due to its size and street frontage availability the only economical way of developing the whole parcel is to allow shorter street frontages. OthelWise, only a portion of the parcel would be subdivided leaving a 2.5 acre parcel that would not be developed or annexed. 13. Strict compliance with the requirements of 8 11-2-41 o (A) of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, and VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 3 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE developer, because the conditions and requirements of the ordinance would result in inhibiting the achievements or the objective of the ordinance because the lots herein, proposed to be platted, otherwise meet all Zoning Schedule of Bulle and Coverage Controls and this proposal insures the orderly development of this entire in-fill area. 14. The granting of the requested variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other property in the area of the proposed plat, and, in fact, the development of the plat in accordance with the conditions of approval and the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance will prevent the conditions which are the source of the complaints raised in the public hearing of this matter. 15. The granting of this variance will not have an effect of altering the interest and purpose of the Subdivision or Development Ordinance and or the City's Comprehensive Plan for the reaS011S stated in findi11g of fact number 13 and 14. 16. The applicant paid the fee established by the City Council for application variance. CONCLUSIONS OF lAW 1. The City of Meridian has authority pursuant to the enactment of the Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975 codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, and in particular, by the provisions of Idaho Code S 67-6516 to provide as part of its zoning ordinance for the VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 4 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE ( process of applications for variance permits. 2. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority of Idaho Code S 67-6516 by the enactment as a part of its Zoning and Development Ordinance variances, as set forth in S 11-2-419 of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 3. That the requirements for the processing of a variance request are set forth in Idaho Code ss 67 -6509, 6516 and ss 11-2-416E and 418E Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 4. Application and standards for variances are set forth in S 11-2-419B MUlucipal Code of the City of Meridian, and the findings which are required are set forth in S 11-2-419C, include required findings that there are special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that strict application of the provisions of Zoning and Development Ordinance would clearly be impracticable and unreasonable, and a finding that strict compliance with the requirements of the Zoning and Development Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner, subdivider or developer because unusual topography, the nature or condition of adjacent development, or other physical conditions or other conditions that mal<.e strict compliance with the ordinance unreasonable under the circumstances, or that the conditions and requirements of said ordil1ance will result in inhibiting the achievements or the objectives of the ordinance, and VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 5 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE that the granting of a specified variance will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated, and that such variance will not have the effect of altering the interest and purposes of the Zoning and Development Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 5. Section 11-2-410A of the Zoning Schedule of Bulle and Coverage Controls of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian provides for an R-8 Zone which requires 65' to the frontage as shown on "Preliminary Plat of Oliason Parle Subdivision", J.J. Howard EngineeringlSulVeying dated 8/12/98, Drawing No. 311-07-240-000. 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 Tony Hicl,ey, duly authorized agent for the Virginia Jennison Family Trust 2090 S. Cole Road, Boise, Idaho 83709 is hereby granted a platting variance of the Minimum Street Frontage requirements of the R-8 Zone as provided in the Zoning Schedule of Bulle and Coverage Controls of S 11-2-410(A) to allow street frontage as shown on the "Preliminary Plat of Oliason Parle Subdivision", J.J. Howard EngineeringlSUlVeying dated 8/12/98, Drawing No. 311-07-240-000. VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 6 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please tal<e notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a variance authorizing a platting variance of the Minimuln Street Frontage requirements of the R-8 Zone as provided in the Zoning Schedule of Bulk and Coverage Controls of S 11-2-410(A) to allow street frontage as shown on the "Preliminary Plat of Oliason Park Subdivision", J.J. Howard Engineering/Surveying dated 8/12/98, Drawing No. 311-07-240-000 may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seelc a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 7 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORlZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE ( By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held January 5, 1999. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN GLENN BENTLEY VOTED ~ MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAICER) VOTED MOTION: APPROVED: ~ DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public W orles Department. BJ~~~t-~ City Clerk Dated: 1-S--'11 msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Findings3\Variance\Oliason Park Sub Variance Street Frontage.wpd VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST - PAGE 8 BY THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT, TONY HICKEY OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION/FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW & ORDER OF DECISION GRANTING A VARIANCE RECEIYBD JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATfER OF THE APPLICATION ) OF QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. 1/4 MILE ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND WEST OF OVERLAND FROM MERIDIAN- ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ICUNA ROAD SOUTH SIDE BORDERING) DECISION AND ORDER WEST SIDE OF RO-HO ENT, THE ) OF DENIAL APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION AND ) ZONING, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) The above entitled annexation and zoni11g application having come on for public hearing on December IS, 1998, at the hour of 7:00 o'clocl( p.m., and the Applicant, Theron Scott, having appeared and testified and Bob Mitchell, Bill Miatt, Bob Beede, and Steve Tree having appeared and testified i11 favor of the application, and the City Council having duly considered the evidence and the record in this matter therefore mal<es the following Findings of Fact and Conclusio11S of Law, and Decision and Order: FINDINGS OF FACT I. The notice of public hearing on the applicatio11 for annexation and zoning were published for two (2) consecutive weel<s prior to said public hearing schedllled for December 15, 1998, before the City COllncil, the first publication appearing and vvritten notice having been mailed to property ovvners or purchasers of record vvithi11 three FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXATION AND ZONING - QUE,ENLAND ACRES, INC. 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 consideratio11 more than one weel( 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 December 15, 1998, 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 cOlnpliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code ss 67-6509 and 67-6511, and ss 11-2-416E and 11-2-4t7A, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 3. The City Council tal(es judicial notice of its zonl11g, subdivisions and development ordinances codified at Title 11, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, and all current zoning maps thereof, and the COlnprehensive 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. 4. T11e property which is the subject to the application for annexation and zoning is described in the application, a11d by this reference is incorporated herein as if set FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXATION AND ZONING - QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. forth in full. The property is approximately 7.30 acres in size. The property is located 1/4 mile west of Overland fro ill Meridian-I(u11a Road south side bordering west side of Ro-Ho Ent. s. The Applicants are Theron G. Scott and Carol Lotspeich, and Queenland Acres, Inc. is the record o'Vvner of the property and has filed a written request for annexation. 6. The property is presently zoned by Ada County as Rural Transition (RT), and is used primarily for farming. 7. The Applicant requests the property be zoned (C-G), General Retail and Service COlnmercial. 8. The Applicant has requested the annexatio11 and this zOlung, and the application was not initiated at the request of the City of Meridian. 9. The property is located at 670 W. Victory Road, Meridian, Idaho. 10. The proposed site of the subject property is 1/4 mile vvest on Overland Road from Meridian-l(una Road, and south of the Interstate Ce11ter Subdivisio11. 11. The city limits of the City of Meridian abut the subject real property on the east, the north and on the northern porti011 of the west boundary of the subject real property. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXATION AND ZONING - QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. 12. The land vvithin the proposed annexation is contiguous to the present city limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation would not be a shoestring annexation. 13. The property which is the subject of this application is vvithin the Area of Inlpact of the City of Meridia11. 14. The applicant proposes to develop the subject property commercially. 15. The entire parcel of the property is included vvithin the Meridian Urban SelVice Planning Area and the Urban SelVice Planning Area is defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. 16. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council denial of this subject requested annexation and zoning upon the basis that it was inconsistent vvith the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian. 17. The Applicant's requested z011ing of the subject real property as General Retail and SelVice COlnmercial (C-G) is inconsistent vvith the designation of the Meridian COlnprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map which designates the subject property as Single- Fanlily Residential. 18. There are no major or scenic features of major ilnportance that affect the consideration of this application. 19. The property can be physically selViced vvith City water and sevver, if applicant extends the lines. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXA.TION AND ZONING - QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. 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 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 tal(e 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 "Local 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. The requested zoning of General Retail and Service Commercial, (C-G) is defined in the Zoning Ordinance at 11-2-408 B. II. as follows: (C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial: The purpose of the (C-G) District is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel-related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXATION AND ZONING - QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. ( City of Meridian, and shall not constitute strip commercial developn1ent and encourage clustering of commercial developnlent. 5. Idaho Code S 67-6511 provides that requests for an alnendluent to the zoning ordinance and that the request be found to be in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. 6. That in S 11-2-417 A it provides in part that: "If the Commission and Council approve an annexation request, the Commission and Council s11all insure that said annexation is in accord with this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan." 7. By authority of the City of Meridian under the COluprehensive Plan, a conditional use permit is required for Applicant to construct and operate any stores or facilities on this parcel of land. 8. Section 11-2-416 D 2 states: "If the adoption of a zoning aluendment application requires an amendment to the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, the Meridian COluprehensive Plan shall be amended prior to the consideration of the ZOni11g amendnlent and the procedures provided in Chapter 65, Title 67, Idaho Code, shall be followed on the an1endment to the Comprehensive Plan and, until the Comprehensive Plan is amended to allow the z011ing amendment, no action will be taken on the zoning amendment." FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXATION AND ZONING - QUEEN LAND ACRES, INC. 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 that the application for annexation and zoning is denied. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please tal(e notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the denial of the armexation and zoning may 'Nithin twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seel, a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXATION AND ZONING - QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held January 5, 1999. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN I<EITH BIRD VOTED ~ VOTED ~ VOTED ~ VOTED ~ VOTED COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE COUNCILMAN GLENN BENTLEY MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE (TIE BREAl<ER) MOTION: IFi/;f:;--- APPROVED: DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public W orl<.5 Department. By:k~fl~r; Ity Clerk Dated: /--5-ff msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Findings3\Annexation and Zoning FF\QUEENLAND ACRES AZ FF FOR CC OI0499.doc RECEIVED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8 DECISION AND ORDER OF DENIAL ANNEXATION AND ZONING - QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: &1/vvfA-(}Vl" S-/ I r tj 9 APPLICANT: Kf1J~~ ZoC; AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: ,tIt~ F I /11/ ~5~ eft.- -r- t)-f ;:::- tvn.-tLs REQUEST: AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: v~ (J/ffro MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: RESOLUTION NO. 20Q RESOLUTION FOR INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: Ke/fh Bt'rd- t;fJ CtJlthC /1 In ah- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN SUPERCEDING RESOLUTION NO.20B ESTABLISHING AND APPOINTING AN INVESTMENT COMMITfEEAND DIRECTING AND EMPOWERING THE CITY TREASURER TO INVEST IDLE FUNDS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH I.C. g~ 50-1013 AND 50-1013AAS THE CASE MAYBE. WHEREAS, it is necessary to supercede Resolution No. 208 to clarify the empowerment of the City Treasurer and modify the approval authority and process of the Investment Committee in order to facilitate the ability of the Treasurer to mal(e timely investment decisions; and WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council to provide for a process by which the investment of City Funds is accomplished in a Inanner that maximizes a return and is in accordance with the requirements ofl.C. SS 50-1013 and 50-10 13A; and WHEREAS, it is found by the City Council that its intentions can be facilitated by the exercise of its authority under I.C. S 50-210 by the establishment and appointment of an Investlnent Committee to advise the City Treasurer; and WHEREAS, it is found by the City Council that the Mayor, Council Preside11t, City Clerl( and City Treasurer are the appropriate elected officials and City officers to serve on the cOlnmittee; and WHEREAS, it is found that the amount and number of investment decisions that will need to be Inade in order to be efficient and tilnely require that the Treasurer be directed and elnpowered by this resolution to mal,e reasonable investments upon the advise and approval of the Investment Committee and upon the advise of Buffington, Mohr, McNeal Registered Investment Advisor, in accordance with their proposal to the City dated the 22nd day of June, 1998, all in accordance with Idaho Code ss 50-1013 and 50-1013A as is appropriate; and RESOLUTION FOR INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 1 ( WHEREAS, it is found that it is in the best interests of the City to direct and empower the City Treasurer to establish an account with Buffington, Mohr, McNeal Registered Investment Advisor in accordance with their proposal to the City dated the 22nd day of June, 1998, to assist and effect this investment directive subject to all investments being in accordance 'With I.C. SS 50-1013 and 50-1013A as is appropriate. NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FORGOING IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AND THIS DOES RESOLVE THAT: 1. There is hereby established an Investment Committee which COffilnittee shall have the duty to advise the City Treasurer on the investment of idle funds of the City in accordance 'With the restrictions on the type of investments and the manner in accordance 'With I.C. Ss 50-1013 and SO-1013A as is appropriate; and 2. The Investment Committee shall consist at all times of the currently serving Mayor and Council President and the currently serving City ClerIc and Treasurer and the same are hereby appointed by virtue of the elected office or officer position they hold; and 3. The City Treasurer is hereby directed and empowered by this resolution to invest such idle funds of the City as are reasonable upon the advise and approval of the Investment Committee which advise and approval may occur at such times as provides efficiency in decision mal<ing in the management of investment accounts; and 4. The City Treasurer is hereby specifically authorized, directed and elnpowered to seelc the investment advise of Buffington, Mohr, McNeal Registered Investment Advisors in accordance 'With their proposal to the City Council dated the 22nd day of June, 1998, entitled "Investment Strategy for funds held by City of Meridian dated June 22, 1998", and to sign all necessary documents together with the City Clerk to carry out this directive and empowerment. 5. That Resolution No. 208 passed by the City Council on December 15, 1998, is hereby superceded by this Resolution. RESOLUTION FOR INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 2 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 5~ day of .JaJ1u.a~1 ' 1 99 9 . APPROVED BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this 51-:!!- day of Jah<<ary , 199 r. By: ""HUH1} 1111/1/ ,-,\ r4:. ~J', ,\\;. ...f V1 ' '/", \." ~, ~~ ~" C>rl'lD. ~~ ~ Jk ~ . ~.""~",,.Y ~ . ~~~~r(Cf-! SEAL'() , CIty Clerl( ~ ~ ~ i - ~ ~~:: msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Resoultions\City Inv~;n~. ~.,. 18"" ,.... . D j ,if ~ ....~ ~ ~J' -., a 4"\1" " /, . n... v "'" ,~ li~t ........uNT 1. \,\ 1III ,,\ II/UU nu\\\\ ATTEST: RESOLUTION FOR INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 3 ( JUSTIN P. AYLSWORTH JULIE KLEIN FISCHER WM. F. GIGRAY. III D. SAMUEL JOHNSON WILLIAM A. MORROW CHRISTOPHER S. NYE PHILIP A. PETERSON STEPHEN L. PRUSS ERIC S. ROSSMAN TODD A. ROSSMAN R. STEPHEN RUTHERFORD TERRENCE R. WHITE WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE. SUITE 31 POST OFFICE BOX 1150 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83680..1150 TEL (208) 288..2499 FAX (208) 288..2501 NAMPA OFFICE 104 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH POST OFFICE BOX 247 NAMPA. IDAHO 83653.0247 TEL (208) 466.9272 FAX (208) 466..+405 Email viaInternet@\vfg@\vppnlg.com PLEASE REPLY TO MERIDIAN OFFICE January 57 1999 Mayor Robert D. Corrie Janice Smith, City Treasurer William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerl< Charlie Rountree, Council President MERlDIAN CITY HALL 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 RECEIVED J;~N - 5 1S9S CITY OF MERIDIAN Re: CITY OF MERIDIAN INVESTMENT OF FUNDS RESOLUTION Dear Mayor Corrie, Janice, Will and Counciln1an Rountree: Enclosed please find the follovving docllments: 1. Resolution No. 2. Certificate of Clerl(; 3. Men10 pertaining to the investn1e11t of funds; and 4. Letter to Buffington, Mohr, McNeal. The an1ended Resolution is a result of my meeting with Mr. Buffington and Mr. McNeal on the 28th of December. I a111 novv vvaiting for their revievv and request your revievv as ,veIl. f Enclosllres msg\D:\N1yFiles\1\1eridian City File\Letters2\Mayor Janice Will Rountree Itr [nvest Res 0 I 0599.\vpd ( ( RECEIVED interoffice MEMORANDUM JAM - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN To: Mayor Robert D. Corrie Charlie Rountree, Council President Janice Smith, City Treasurer Will Berg, City Clerk Buffington, Mohr, McNeal From: Wm. F. Gigray, III Subject: CITY INVESTMENT OF FUNDS Date: January 5, 1999 Please find attached to this memo a proposed Resolution which will supercede Resolutiol1 No. 208 passed by the City Council on the 15th day of December. Please note that I have n1et vvith Dean Buffington and Carey McNeal in my office on the 28th of Decen1ber. At that meeting we reviewed the Resolution which was passed by the City Council on the 15th. A5 you recall, I drafted that Resolution as a result of the review of a memo received from the City Treasurer, which vvas still in rough draft form. This Resolution provides for more flexibility to the Treasurer and is not so explicit about setting .up an account with Buffington, Mohr, McNeal because vvhat they will be doing, for the most part, is providing investment advise. The City may incur delay in the establishment of investment accounts unless this is changed. The actual accounts vvill be, in most instances, set up vvith other entities in compliance with State law and restrictions on investments. This Resolution also provides more flexibility in the approval and advise process by the Investment Con11uittee to allovv that process to follovv function. I also believe it vvill be more appropriate to have the Treasurer and the ClerIc sign the documents rather tl1an other melnbers of the Committee. The Treasurer vvill report and get tht7 approval of t11e Committee on all investments and they "viII direct this process that you have envisioned. ( File Page 2 February 12, 1998 Mayor Corrie and Janice Smith, City Treasurer, I recommend the following: 1. That this Resolution be placed on the January 5, 1999, agenda for consideration by the City Council; and 2. After passage that the City Treasurer establish an initial meeting of the Investn1ent Committee and representatives of Buffington, Mohr, McNeal to review operational aspects of this directive and establish ground rules of committee operations and meeting schedule which will have to be noticed under the open n1eeting lavv. Msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\GIGRAY MEMOS\Investment MemoO I0599.\vpd Office of the City Attorney t i:'. \ ~ - ~ I ~9 q ~.~ .J. . l J ~J,..... '. . 200 E. Carlton Ave. Suite 31 PO Box 11 50 Meridian 10 83680-1150 Phone: 288-2499 Fax: 288-2501 E-mail: wfg@wppmg.com :RECEIVED. CITY OF l\1ERIDL~~ To: Mayor, City Council and City Clerk From: Bill GigraYJ City Attorney Re: Resolution Superceding Resolution N . 208 Appointing Investment Committee and Directing and Empowering the City Treasurer to Make Investments Date: January 5, 1999 Along with this memo I am attaching a resolution superceding Resolution no. 208 regarding the above subject. The purpose of the resolution to supercede rather than amend is to insure that the original resolution remains in tack during the period and to provide a full text of the resolution in one document. I recommend that this matter does not require a public hearing or notice and that it could be added to the agenda as provided in Idaho Code 3 67-2343 (1) which provides in its relevant parts: " ....A forty-eight (48) hour agenda notice shall be required in advance of each regular meeting, however, additional agenda items may be added after completion of the agenda up to and including the hour of the meeting, provided that a good faith effort is made to include in the notice all agenda items known at the time to be probable items of discussion....". The City Clerk and Mayor have made a good faith effort to include all items on the agenda as this matter comes from the City Attorney's office as just having been prepared and is the result of very recent consultations with the Investment Firm Dean Buffington and Carey McNeal who have advised of the needed adjustments which have been explained in an other memo from this office. ( ( WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P.A. JUSTIN P. AYLSWORTH JULIE KLEIN FISCHER WM. F. GIGRAY. III D. SAMUEL JOHNSON WILLIAM A. MORROW CHRISTOPHER S. NYE PHILIP A. PETERSON STEPHEN L. PRUSS ERIC S. ROSSMAN TODD A. ROSSMAN R. STEPHEN RUTHERFORD TERRENCE R. WHITE ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE. SUITE J I POST OFFICE BOX 1150 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83680..1150 TEL (208) 288-2499 FAX (208) 288~ 2501 NAMPA OFFICE 104 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH POST OFFICE BOX 247 NAMPA. IDAHO 83653-0247 TEL (208) 466~9Z72 FAX (208) 466-4405 Enlail via Internet @> \Vfg~l\vpplng.cOfll PLEASE REPLY TO MERIDIAN OFFICE January 5, 1999 RECEIVED Dean Buffington and Carey lYlcNeal BUFFINGTON MOHR i.'v[cNEAl HISTORlC HOFF BUILDING 802 West Bannocl, Street, Sui te 1 00 P.O. Box 2016 Boise, Idaho 8370 1 .J J~)j "- 5 19 ~J .~J CITY OF MERIDIAN Re: CITY OF IvlERIDIAN INVESTMENT OF FUNDS Dear NIr. Buffi11gton and 1\;1r. lvlcNeal: I appreciated the opponunity of n1eeting \vith t11e t\VO of you on the 28th of Decen1ber. As a result of that n1eeting, I have prepared a draft of a Resolution vvhich \viII superced t11e previous Resolution passed by the City Council on t11e 15th of December. I have provided a full text rather than just an an1endn1el1t in order to facilitate ease of reading. Please revie\\f aI1d COll1ment. This \vill go before the scl1eduled City Council meeting tonight, othef\.vise it "viII be delayed t"vo \veelcs. cc: iVlavor Robert D. Cc)rrie Janice SI11it11, City Treasllrer William G. Berg, Jr., Cit!' CIerI, Charlie Rountree, Cou11cil PresideI1t Enclosure msg\D:\1V1yFiles\lV1eridian City Fil~\Letters2\Buffington 0-1cNealltr on City Investment R~solution 0 I0599.\vpd / ( RESOLUTION NO. 208 RESOLUTION FOR INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN BY: &u1eiII'hClJ't 6Ird..-' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ESTABLISHING AND APPOINTING AN INVESTMENT COMMITTEE AND DIRECTING AND EMPOWERING THE CITY TREASURER TO INVEST IDLE FUNDS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN ACCORDANCE WITH I.C. 9950-1013 AND 50-1013AAS THE CASE MAY BE. WHEREAS, it is the intention of the City Council to provide for a process by which the investment of City Funds is accomplished in a manner that ma.-"Ximizes a return and is in accordance with the requirements ofI.C. 99 50-1013 and 50-10 13A; and ... WHEREAS, it is found by the City Council that its intentions can be facilitated by the exercise of its authority under I.c. 9 50-210 by the establishment and appointment of an Investment Committee to advise the City Treasurer; and WHEREAS, it is found by the City Council that the .i\tlayor, Council President, City Clerk and City Treasurer are the appropriate elected officials and City officers to serve on the comn1ittee; and WHEREAS, it is found that the amount and number of investment decisions that will need to be made in order to be efficient and timely require that the Treasurer be directed and empowered by this resolution to make reasonable investments upon the advise and consent of the Investment Committee; and WHEREAS, it is found that it is in the best interests of the City to direct and empower the City Treasurer to establish an account with Buffington, Mohr, McNeal Registered Investment Advisor in accordance with their proposal to the City dated the 22nd day of June, 1998, to assist and effect this investment directive subject to all investments being in accordance vvith I.c. 9& 50-1013 and 50-1013A as is appropriate. RESOLUTION FOR INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN - 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FORGOING IT IS ( HEREBY RESOLVED AND THIS DOES RESOLVE THAT: 1. There is hereby established an Investment Committee which committee shall have the duty to advise the City Treasurer on the investment of idle funds of the City in accordance with the restrictions on the type of investments and the manner in accordance 'with I.C. ~~ 50-1013 and 50-1013A as is appropriate; and 2. The Investment Committee shall consist at all times of the currently serving Mayor and Council President and the currently serving City Clerk and Treasurer and the same are hereby appointed by virtue of the elected office or officer position they hold; and 3. The City Treasurer is hereby directed and empowered by this resolution to invest such idle funds of the City as are approved by a majority of the Investment Committee subject to the condition that specific investment transaction/s shall include the City Treasurer's signature and the signature of one other committee member; and 4. The City Treasurer is hereby specifically authorized directed and empowered to establish an investment account vvith Buffington, Mohr, McNeal Registered Investment Advisors in accordance with their proposal as submitted to the City Council entitled "Investment Strategy for funds held by City of Meridian dated June 22, 1998, and to sign all necessary documents together with the City Clerk to carry out this directive and empovverment. 'pASSED BY ~E CIn; COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this I~ day of eem,/;uA, , 199$. APPRO~D BY THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /~ day of ./Jec.enJJ.ef- ,199&. a r Rob~~, Dt'lth;orrle ,,\\\ \ 1.:1 -filII '\\.\....( 0, ';.yF~~."...... ,.f11 " ~"'\ 60-,1< ';..J /.... " 0" --.....-.,,:......?.;.J..~~ /". ,.... r ~ ~.~ ""'jr) ...., ~t. ~ ~ v CiOl~\..4vl.4..... ">.. r ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ::: ,r.. V ~ - - SE.l\.L _ msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Resoultions\City Invest~nt.w i?~ ,J::> g ,.. Q ,<if'. 0 ..... ~ 70 USr lS"\ ' ~ ,'2' ..:,. ~ ~ ....' RESOLUTION FOR v//...;,,00UNT'< . ~\,,,,,,,,, INVESTMENTS OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN -"'Zllllll/lIlt1t'\\\\\ ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5. 1999 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS ITEM NUMBER: 258-1 REQUEST: DIGESTER FACILITIES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT TO EXISTING KELLER ASSOCIATES DESIGN CONTRACT AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: vV cur fr[O IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( \ ( (~ KELLER ASSOCIATES 131 S.W. 5th Avenue, Suite A · Meridian, In 83642 November 19, 1998 Mr. Gary Smith, P.E. City of Meridian Department of Public Works 200 E. Carlton Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject: Digester Facilities Agreement Amendment Dear Gary: As we discussed at our meeting of October 20, 1998 our current design agreement does not address conversion of the existing mesophilic digesters to thermophilic digestion. We indicated in our agreement that we would evaluate the process, however, did not include it in our engineering design budget because at that time we were not sure that the innovative TP AD process would merit implementation. We have since recommended that the process be implemented, which requires additional engineering design work on our part. We have talked to McMahon Associates ofNeenah, Wisconsin about participating in the TPAD predesign and design with Keller Associates. McMahon Associates is the firm that designed and implemented the first use of this process in the u.s. at Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin. They have agreed and will provide valuable input and final review of the TP AD design. Attached are additional costs for implementation of the TP AD process. The additional work would be completed for the lump sum amount of $18,820, which is approximately 7.5% of the estimated TPAD facilities construction costs of $250,000. We would appreciate your review of this Scope of Work Amendment and approval if found to be agreeable. If acceptable, please sign one copy of this letter below and return it to me. If I can answer any questions, please call. Respectfully Submitted: Approved By: e~ ~. ><:::::/~ Dennis M. Suihkonen Project Manager City of Meridian // / / ,9/.9 8 Date Date 197040/5/98-967 Be A Company of Professional Engineers and Scientists Ph: (208) 288-1992- Fax: (208) 288-1999 r.JJ ~E--. t:z e~ ~~ ffi~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~o ~~ E-c~ r/.}O ~u Or/.} ....-..c o JJ J-. ~ "0 ~ U) ;..... ;:j o ::c c C\1 ~ o () ~ o~ U) U) <t: c: o ...c: C'd ~ () ;...; ~ ~ w~ dN .C 0... ...c: .~ :D s::: ,S U) Q) "'"0 ~ ~ ~ .~ ........ > a 0.) ........ ~ Q) ~ 0... . J ~ ~\O o ~ t:l..4 ;...; s::: W~ a ctf U) <t: .~ ~ ~ Q) · Ui E--. ~ -+-' 0) . ~ s:::...c: ......, 0) -+-' C 6 ~ .~ ~ c2 ~ .3 ~ U) ""0 ~ H U) 0)........ Q) "Cd..,....; ::3 () c:: ~ c:r 0 tCro~a \.0 o \0 ~ o ~ \000 00 8 2 ~ a ~ 0... v r:/) r:/)t) b[J a ~ .S .8 CD -+-' U) s::: cd >. .,.....c OJ C/) ~ ::c OJ) OJ a Sn. 5 ...c: .~ ~ ~ ~ ] gl. .. \0 t.r) 0 NO €A ~ 000 \O~o ~~ 000 NOOO ~\O 000 ~ \0 0 ~~ 00 00 0000 ~O\N f7q0\ ("i") CI) .8 ~ cO ocG- ~ ...c: b[J.s v ~ .5 8 .;; 0 :-: ~ ~~CC(/) 00 NO t""---.... I"""""'l.... \0 N ~ EI=) E,q U) +-' C/) 8~~ H C/) U o 0 +-' ...D () lU c;j +-' c..> lU ~ ~ > +-' :.a ~ o c: r- r-l--('-' ~. +-' C/) o U ~ +-' o r- ( ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5. 1999 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS ITEM NUMBER: 258-2 REQUEST: GARY SMITH - CONTRACT DRILLING OF EXPLORATORY WATER TEST WELL AT NO.8 AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION ~~ ( Exploratorv Test-Well #8 CONTRACT This Contract, made and entered into this 7 day of December , 19 98 , by and between the City of Meridian, Idaho, hereinafter called the "Owner", and Stevens & Sons Well Drilling.. Ioc of 2794 Greenwood Circle.. Boise.. ID 83706 hereinafter called the "Contractor'" WITNESSETH: The Contractor, in consideration of the sum to be paid him by the Owner and of the covenants and agreements herein contained, hereby agrees at his own proper cost and expense to complete drilling of the test well at Well Site No.8 on the Owner's property adjacent to Meridian Park to the extent of the Bid made by the Contractor dated the---:l day of December , 19 98 , all in full compliance with the Contract Documents referred to herein. The BIDDING REQUIREMENTS, including the signed copy of the BID, the CONTRACT FORMS, and the SPECIFICATIONS, are hereby referred to ~d by reference made a part of this Contract as fully and completely as if the same'\Were fully set forth herein and are mutually cooperative therewith. '; In consideration of the performance of the work as set forth in there Contract Documents the Owner agrees to pay to the Contractor the amount bid as adjusted in accordance with the Contract Documents, the sum of . Twentv One Thousandft Five-Hundred Eleven Dollars and Ninety Cents. Dollars ( $21..511.90), or as otherwise herein provided, and to make such payment at the completion of the drilling work and acceptance thereof by the City of Meridian. The Contractor agrees to complete the work within the time specified herein and to accept as full payment hereunder the amounts computed as deterinined by the measured unit items of work at the unit priced bid. It is agreed that the work as specified in the Contract Documents, shall be complete, within thirty (30) days after the date of this Contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we, the parties hereto, each herewith subscribe the same this _ day of December , 1 9 98. City of Meridian, Idaho By Name Title By Name Title Address Zip I(~ ;) ?91&e~(,AjUt4:Jc:fle/tch fj'3?03 2 Attest: By Name Title Attest: By Name Title " ( STEVENS & SONS WELL DRILLING, INC. 2794 Greenwood Circle Boise, Idaho 83706 (208) 345-6389 December 1, 1998 Estimate For Meridian Test Well #8 1 Drilling Permit $100 $100 1 Mobilization $300 $300 800 8" Drilling $18. DO/foot $14,400 36 8" casing $9.5 D/foot $342 752 2" pve Flush Pipe $2. 95/foot $2,218.40 50 2" pve Flush Screen $5.25/foot $262.50 20 #8-#12 Silica Sand $14.00/bag $280.00 750 Core Pipe Rental $1. DO/foot $750.00 1800 lbs Bentonite Grout $O.115/lb $207.00 20 hrs Install Pipe, Sand, Grout, & Develop $ 125/hour $2,500 1 8" Driveshoe $128 $128 1 2" pve caps $12.00 $24.00 Total Estimate $21,511.90 By: Date: J) /795 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5. 1999 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS ITEM NUMBER: 258-3 REQUEST: GARY SMITH - CONTRACT FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING OF PUMP AND PUMPHOUSE FOR CITY WELL NO. 18 IN SUMMERFIELD SUBDIVISION AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: SEE ATTACHED INFORMATION CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: vJ/ OI{1iV CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. I _ ( ( Glenn K. Bennett, P.L.S. President Civil Survey Consultants, Inc. P.o. Box 39 1530 W. State Street Meridian, Idaho 83680 (208)888-4312 Fax 888-0323 Timothy A. Burgess, P.E. Vice President December 14, 1998 Gary Smith, P.E. City Engineer City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Well No. 18 (Lot 12, Block 8, Summerfield Subdivision No.1) Dear Gary: Thank you for considering Civil Survey Consultants to provide professional services required for the construction of new pumping facilities for Well No. 18. I propose to provide these services based upon the following scope of services: Design Services: 1. The new well is not constructed as of this date. It is the desire of the City of Meridian to proceed with the design of pumping facilities for this well and obtain regulatory approval prior to completion of the well based upon estimated conditions from the test well. This scope of services is based upon the completed well not being a flowing artesian well. The City of Meridian will provide CSC an estimated flow and drawdown for the pupose of preparing plans and specfications for the pumping facility prior to constructing the well. 2. CSC has previously performed a site survey of the well lot; prepared a well siting checklist for the site; and submitted the checklist to DEQ for approval. The City of Meridian has paid CSC in full for this work, and it is not included in the fees covered under this contract. 3. CSC will provide complete design services required for preparation of plans and specifications for new pumping facilities. The site is located within a residential subdivision. The new pumping facilities will be compatible with the residential setting and will include the following components: a. The well building will be wood frame construction with aluminum siding and architectural fiberglass shingles. The new building will be approximately 16' wide by 28' long similar to the building designed and constructed for Well No. 19. ( c'- ( Smith December 14, 1998 Page 2 of 4 b. The well will be equipped with a new vertical turbine pump. The new pump will be selected based upon the characteristics of the actual completed well. Motor will not exceed 125 horsepower to insure that the pumps will be compatible with the portable generator to be purchased by the City. Final pump selection will be based upon the completed well characteristics. c. The pump motor will be controlled by a Variable Frequency Drive (VFD). The drive unit will be identical to the unit installed in Well No. 17 and 19. d. 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 actual antenna and wiring will be installed by the City. The Contract will require the Contractor to install conduit between the RTU and VFD, along witll the necessary contacts and wiring for the desired telemetry functions. The City will provide a list of functions to be included, and the type of contact required. d. The building will include heating, ventilation and air conditioning. The building will also include a plug in and manual transfer switch for the portable generator to be purchased by the City. The plug in receptacle will match those previously installed by the City at Well No. 12 and Well No. 16, Well No. 17, and Well No. 19. e. Site improvements will consist of an asphalt driveway, and restoration of existing sod and automatic sprinkler system on the well lot. f. Well No. 18 will be provided with a pressure bypass pipeline to the South Slough located in Locust Grove Road approximately 1900 feet away from the well site. 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. It is anticipated that the completed well will closely match the preliminary estimates and tIle revisions required after the well is completed will be verifaction of the pump curve and nlotor size which is included in this scope of services and fee estimate. Should a lnajor redesign be required which changes the sizing and configuration of the discharge piping and electrical components a supplemental agreement will be negotiated for the additional work. (' Smith December 14, 1 998 Page 3 of 4 6. CSC will provide an advertisement for bids for publication by the Owner; answer any pre-bid questions; attend the bid opening. 7. CSC will attend a pre-construction meeting. 8. The Owner will issue the Notice Of Award, Agreement, and Notice To Proceed, and will handle all contract administrative work. Construction Services: 1. CSC 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. CSC 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. We propose to provide the Design Services as outlined above on a time and materials basis with a not to exceed amount of$ 10,464.50 without prior approval of the Owner. We propose 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. I estimate the fee for construction services will be approximately $ 7303.50. The above fee estimates are based upon utilizing Taylor Engineers for the electrical engineering services and Elkhorn Engineering for mechanical services. I have also enclosed a copy of my man-hour and fee estimates for your reference. The above fee estimates assume the City will pay all costs associated with permits, licenses, testing, and publishing costs. The above fee estimates are in addition to the fees which have already been received for the well siting checklists, design survey, by-pass layout and preliminary site plan. (-C ( ( Smith December 14, 1998 Page 4 of4 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 ene. ( Civil Survey Consultants Man-hour Estimate City of Meridian Municipal Well No. 18 Task Description Professional Project Technician 2-Man or Total Engineer Engineer GPS 1. By-Pass Pipe Design b. By-Pass Surveys 16 16 32 c. By-Pass Piping Plans 12 12 24 d. Review and Approval 8 8 2. Pum House Design a. Coordination & Meetings 2 2 b. Hydraulic Analysis 2 8 10 c. Pump & Piping 8 4 12 d. Building 2 4 6 e. Site Design 2 8 16 26 f. Contract Documents 2 12 14 g. Review and Approval 8 8 3. Bidding a. Coordination & Meetings 4 4 Design & Bidding Total Man-Hours 12 66 52 16 146 4. Construction a. Coordination & Meetings 2 2 b. Construction Staking 8 8 b. Inspection 8 40 48 c. Payment Estimates 12 12 d. Change Orders 12 12 e. Record Drawings 4 24 28 Construction Total Man-Hours 14 88 0 8 110 Well18.xls 12/14/98 Well18.xls ( Civil Survey Consultants Design Fee Estimate City of Meridian Municipal Well No. 18 Classifiaction Hours Rate Total Professional Engineer 12.00 @ $70.00 = $840.00 Project Engineer 66.00 @ $55.00 = $3,630.00 Technician 52.00 @ $45.00 = $2,340.00 2-Man Survey Crew 16.00 @ $90.00 = $1,440.00 Labor Subtotal 146.00 $8,250.00 Classifiaction Hrs/Miles Rate Total Misc. Printing $200.00 Mileage 50.00 @ $0.29 = $14.50 Elkhorn - HV AC $500:00 Taylor - Electrical $1,500.00 Direct Subtotal $2,214.50 Total Design Fees $10,464.50 12/14/98 ..~ . ~ J. Well18.xls / t Civil Survey Consultants Construction Services Fee Estimate City of Meridian Municipal,Well No. 18 Classifiaction Hours Rate Total Professional Engineer 14.00 @ $70.00 = $980.00 Project Engineer 88.00 @ $55.00 = $4,840.00 Professional Land Surveyor 0.00 @ $7.00 = $0.00 2-Man/GPS Survey Crew 8.00 @ $85.00 = $680.00 Labor Subtotal 110.00 $6,500.00 Classifiaction Hrs/Miles Rate Total Misc. Printing $20.00 Mileage 150.00 @ $0.29 = $43.50 Elkhorn - HV AC $180.00 Taylor - Electrical $560.00 Direct Subtotal $803.50 Total Construction Fees $7,303.50 12/14/98 ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5. 1999 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS ITEM NUMBER: 258-4 REQUEST: GARY SMITH - BID RESULTS FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: ih#t hn-tvt7lnV ) CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: ~ ./ __, St({t/~ r&~ ?'J ~I,J O/fP cP ~ ~)~ ~ rP ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( MEMORANDUM To: Mayor & City Council J#U From: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk Date: January 05, 1999 RE: City Council Meeting 1-5-99 on Item # 23 8-4 Janitorial Services Bid Results The attached information has been compiled for your review concerning the bid results for janitorial services for the City of Meridian. There are several points that may need to be discussed before awarding this contract. ,.... bid results on 12-22-98 at 3:00 PM - 5 bidders - references and their comments for Enviroclean - references and their comments for Custom Cleaning Services ~ cost of current cftyjanftorial services - requirement of background check by Meridian Police Dept ..-... need for requirement for bonding - Planning & Zoning check for compliance of business location Since this area is not of Gary Smith and myself expertise, we are trying to provide you with information that would be adequate for your decision making process. co J: c~ co::::: :.00 · L: ....., CD C'tI :Eoo '-I- C) 00') ..0-':- a_ N- UN L.. "'- -ECD 0').0 ~~ .- t.) c: Q) mCl en _ a:J~ .~ . o a... :::::0 Co m . a J ('C) CJ z ":'-;Z UUJ Wa.. JO 00 0:::_ Q..m i ~ 0\ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ,~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'- ~~ ~ .~ I't\, \ ,~ \X\ ~ ~ C5 ~~ \ \ "" .I~ ~ ........ .~ ~ ~"- ~~ ~~ ~ ~\ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..-~ ~ ~ ~ " ~~ t\J ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ V) :~A ~ ~~ L.: U . . m <D J- 'U (fi Z ~ ~ a:l 0. O~ E 0 ~l u c en :>-a o l- a_ CD L:: -"'u tD CU-o a.. E.- 0 ,-CD ~ L- ~'I-o 0.. C 0 -u -"0 CU Q) -Q) en c:: CO '- '--.- o (l) CD :J a.. -- Co- eCl) Q) CD a..~ '-'0:: ( .( ~ ~l t,...... ........ i ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ \\\ '- \...: "0 . - (]) Q) J- u ...., Z n ~ ~ CO c. "'- ~~ E 0 0 "t:J al u Q) A .~ \::' ::J (1) 0- 0... Q) 0 a:: ( '- c a.. - "'0 0 :.;:: CO Q) CO fJ) en c:: E ID OOJ ~.- L-U e'" ~-o C.- 0...0:3 -CO ( ( QUESTIONS FOR REFERENCES 1. How long has this janitorial company worked for you? 2. Are you satisfied with their work? 3. How often do they clean for your facilities? 4. Did this janitorial company obtain this position through a bid? 5. What time of day do they clean? 6. What size is the facility that they clean? ....;.."" ,. .<..~~~f,i, .'; .~~: ':~~";::, f / N'I'~O~L~IfN ~l€A"f"S 141ft/. ~ ~'''fe4€''e~ REFERENCES Idaho Dept. of Transportation" Dist. 3 East Boise Port of Entry' 8) 50 Chinden Blvd. Boise ID Contact Craig LaChance 334..3272 City of Boise The BUS 300 S. Ave. A Boise ID Contact KeJli Fairless 336-)Oi9Ext. 105- RPM Machine 272 E. 51h #C Meridiant ~D Contact Faye 8B7-7770 Idaho State Police Port ofEnlry Inspection Facility Contact John Surline 884..7033 ~ 1/: {.J,ll 8erJ ......-------------------..-----......- --.-.-- -.. .-...... 4_.___....,. __ - -.. ~ _~._. ... ..~_~. .. ...... ...... _ _. ~... .. I ..... ... . ~"___. ..._,..... 4-....4..._..~.p ___ .._,_____ _. ~.. ..~.~_... 2096 N. Sapphire PI. ~ DEe 22 '98 16:50 Meridian, Idaho 8364 2 ~ (208) 888-0069 2088870904 PAGE.01 (- ENVIROCLEAN IDAHO DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION DIST.3 East Boise Port of Entry 8150 Chinden Blvd., Boise, ID Craig LaChance 1. 5 years approx 2. They keep getting the bid... 3. Weekdays, occasional weekends (shampooing) 4. On bid basis 5. Contract 8am - noon 6. 1 conference 5 small 2 large 2 more rooms-daily use. Summer mowing--winter sidewalks requirements of contract City of Boise The BUS 300 S. Ave A., Boise, ID Kelli Fairless 1. Kelli hasn't been involved with Enviroclean (she's new to this position), current contract extended a month, putting out a new bid. 2. She hasn't heard that they are dissatisfied. Only complaint is that shelters are not cleaned enough,.but that could be-the-way the contract is written. 3. Once a week. Each shelter (transit shelters). 4. On bid basis 5. Don't know... 6. 6' X 12' shelters RPM Machine 272 E. 5th #C, Meridian, ID Faye 1 . Several years 2. Sure 3. Every other week 4. Don't remember 5. Some time at night on the weekend 6. Small office 550 sq. ft & two bathroom Idaho State Police Port of Entry Inspection Facility John Surline 1 . 2-3 years 2. Difficult question, they're good then they get lax, inconsistent (poor comments in the last year), bathrooms not as clean as they would like. 3. Twice week 4. Bid basis price, not that bad of a job (they are the only ones that bid) 5. 2 offices autobay garage restroom ...'~ , \. . , , 10 I . ~ ," . I <.; '. . , 1, . ; . DEe 22 '98 18:44 CUstom UeaningJervice & Building Maintenance LLC ( City of Meridian 33 East Idaho Meridian, ID 83642 Attn: Will Berg, City Clerk 22 December, 1998 Dear 1vfr. Berg, Below are the references which you requested. If you need any further references or other information, please give me a call. I look forward to hearing from you. Slllcerely, Lora L. Phillippi Owner References Terry Parsley (208)939-5462 Pacific Build,ers (208)376-0000 Contact Person: Cheryl Eau Claire Z~oDefucts \__ ~ (208) 322-0500 JD lfj~ Contact Person: Ewa Luminski Eagle Montessori Center (208)938-0100 Contact Person: Jody 1 052 N. Glen Abby PI. Eagle, ID Residential Customer 11505 Fairview Ave_ Boise, ID 83713 Commercial Customer 12554 W. Bridger St. Boise,ID 83713 Commercial Custo mer(past) 655 Rivershore Ln. Eagle, ID 83616 Commercial Customer 3413 N. COLE RD, #124 BOISE, 10 83704 (208) 378-0943 CELLULAR (208) 371-'961 LORALEE@MICRON.NE:T 2083277650 PAGE. 02 CUSTOM CLEANING SERVICE & BUILDING MAINTENANCE LLC Terry Parsley Residential Customer 1. 6 months. 2. Very satisfied, dependable 3. Once a week 4. Friend referred her 5. Late morning 6. 1725 wI dog & cat Pacific Builders Commercial Customer 1. 2 mo. 2. Sure, nobody to compare to... 3. Every two weeks 4. Bid offer 5. Sunday morning 6. Show room, 3 offices, 3 bathrooms Zero Defects Ewa 1. approximately 1 year (at least, if not more) 2. Yas 3.. Twice a week 4. Don't know Jo 1. year 2. yes (seems pleased) 3. Started with 3x a week cut them back to 2x a week 4. Bid basis, also recommended from a supplier 5. Early morning 6. 12,000 sq ft. Eagle Montessori Center Jody 1. 2 months 2. Yes, overall, average to better 3. Daily 4. Evening 5. 2 classrooms & office 3 restrooms ( January 5, 1999 RECEIVED JAN - ~ 1999 CITY OF IVIERIDIAN TO: Will Berg FROM: Rata Cunningham The following is a list of the Janitorial Services the City is currently paying. AMOUNT DEPARTMENT VENDOR PER MONTH City Hall Cindy Nichols 1250.00 Parks Office Day's Cleaning 175.00 Building Dept Kraig Wartman 200.00 Water Dept Laura Nichols 250.00 Police Dept Maid in the Desert 841.00 TOTAL Paid by the City for Contracted Janitorial $ 2,716.00 ** TX CONFIRMATluN REPORT ** ( AS OF JAN 05 '~ 17:26 PAGE. 01 CITY OF MERIDIAN DATE TIME TO/FROM 04 01/05 17:24 PUBLIC WORKS MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD~ STATUS UF--S 01'20" 008 140 OK MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5.1999 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS REQUEST: GARY SMITH - 810 RESULTS FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES ITEM NUMBER: 268-4 AGENCY CITY CLERK: COMMENTS lit;;" hn-~{J'tnV CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CllY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN JRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAu OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: &I Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.. 0\ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 00 ~~ ~~ u~ z~ ~~ ~~ o~ ~O ~oo. ~~ ~~ o ( ( oS ~ -,-..j ~ ~ I U (],) tU rn Q.) r.n ~ O:E .~ ~ ~ .~ ~ C Pot ~U~oo o ~..o rr.J ~ ~ ~ (1).~ ~ ~ """tj~c ~"""tj cd E--- Cd · .~ a s ~ ~ ~ - ~ = Q)~~~(1)o ..d 0 -~ (.) ~ 0.. ~ ~ ~ S rr.J rr.J ~~oo-~ ~ <u 0 · 0 ..d ~ oS .s ~ z =~"""tjCd~ o (]) = ~ C"-- ~ ~ OJ ~.s ~ n tS ~ ;;>-."""tj ~ .s~"""tjCd~Q) ~ """tj s .~ 6- rJ:J~C=Od 80\Cdog~ ..d~rr.J~~Q) u ~ tr.J """tj "U .~ =tr)~.....; ..d ~~.s~E~ - ,..-4 t:r ~ """tj 1"\ ~d ~;;; oo~ 0 ~ Cd a . s rr.J"""tj ~ 0.. ~ _~ ~ (1) r.n (1) ~ E--- .gf.;!3 ~ ~ d ~ .E; S "d ~ .::::l ~ ~..o :3 ~... g~..o..d~~ ;>-. C> .s ~ 0\ :> ~ ("'f') = ..l:i ~ ..,. e= ~ O"""tj f1)" · = O~rJ)c~O c.g~~C\JcoS .= OJ) o.c ~ Cd ~ ~ Q)~ r.n .s - -S ~ 2 en ~ Q) = = -,..-4 0..> ~ tr.J 0 0 tr.J ..d 0) ~I"\"""tj 0 :E=~(1)Q)o ~o~~g~ .~ :;;.. ~ r:n .. ~ 0 ~ -~ (1) ~ s~ ~..d o .~ ~ 3 8.;!3 ~ t:: g ~.;!3 ~ ~2=~"""tjo ~~8~~~ ~I"\ o o~ -~ ~ U ~ lU 0,) ~oS ~~ = = o 0 -Uj oS . ,...( u = (1) 0,) """tj );> (1)~ ~ - QJ~ 6 0 ..dU ~ 0 tr.J o -a .~ ~"""tj~ lU ~ · ,-..j o.c ........ ~.s~ 1.\,1 ~ 0 ~as s ~ .s ;>.30 Q) 0.. ~ ~ f'\~ ~~o ~o"S ~ U ~ """tj~o Q) 0 ~ ~'B a ~o.;!3 (1) o..d - ~ ..s~~ Q).~ 0 ~"""tj <1)=....... ,.d~= (l)..d..d ~ ~ ~ G'o..o ~~S ~~ .. ..0 ~ ~"'d~ o (],) :;.. ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .!= ;> (],) ~oS RECEIVED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN ( ( ACCT NAME i ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE 2-1200 SMART, B h332 W 1ST ST 73.60 21-1010 ABSMEIER, JAMES i 48.16 12911 N QUARRYSTONE WY 2-6180 AHRENS, TERRY I !1228 W 11TH ST 73.93 2-4740 ALBRECHT, JUDY 11406 W 14TH ST 75.95 I i 50-244 ALGER, BRENT 1114 E STATE AVE 58.16 I 21-184 ALLEN, ROBERT 12659 W CREEKSTONE CT 96.41 ! 31-3422 ALLEN, TIM 11034 FAIRWOOD CT 94.77 51-50 AMYX FAMIL Y LIMITED 137 E BROADWAY AVE 319.22 I 3-840 ANDERSON, VICKY 1580 W BROWNFIELD WY 64.15 I 2-2320 ANDREWS, CONAN 1217 W 1ST ST 103.48 21-104 ARRUDA, BRANDON 2634 N WA TERSTONE WY 58.28 21-1708 ARTE, MICHELLE -2287 LEANN WY 79.47 I 74-3014 ARY, DAVID 1672 S PELICAN WY 65.33 34-1952 ASEGUINOLAZA, MARIA 885 W WILLOWBROOK DR 69.63 21-2728 ATKINSON, MONICA 2448 N STONE PL 121.29 21-1928 BAILEY, BRUCE ~590 REBECCA WY I 101.61 21-1930 BAILEY, BRUCE 594 REBECCA WY 42.31 21-2736 I I BAILEY, MICHELLE 2506 N STONE PL 131.48 74-2676 BAIRD, KAREN -292 S OUTFIELD WY ARR 115.20 2-2130 BALDWIN, PIXIE 207 CAMELLIA AVE 63.36 21-1670 BARKWELL, KEVIN 2181 MAXIE PL 45.68 32-744 BARNARD, WILLIAM 30 W WILLOWBROOK DR 77.29 46-106 BARNES, DAVID 901 N FILLMORE WY 66.85 21-1894 BARNHART, CLINTON l2580 MISTY DR 78.80 74-2822 BARR,KENNETH 1421 W CRESTWOOD DR ARR 181.51 31-3060 BASTIAN, DAVID 1960 W CHATEAU DR 82.05 50-750 SA TES, LARRY 1328 E 2 1/2 ST 66.28 I 34-942 BECK, JIM 1553 E HUNTER DR I 121.07 I 32-872 BECKER, ROGER F 671 TIFFANY DR I 103.01 4-2010 BELAIR, DENNIS 2118 W SUNNY SLOPE DR 125.82 2-5690 BELL, DERRICK 11445 W CARL TON AVE 70.30 33-2316 BELL, LILL Y 2518 N ARROW WOOD WY 65.02 69-722 BENA VIDES, RUBEN 1012 E PUFFIN ST 87.23 5-678 BERT, MARK A 1341 N OAK CREEK WAY 68.12 68-272 BERTEL,STEVEN 2534 S VELVET FALLS WY 62.96 21-130 BESKER, GLORIA 2624 N LEANN WY 68.40 4-1834 BITONI, MARK 2495 W SANTA CLARA DR 89.59 3-308 BITTNER, AMANDA 2065 W SNYDER DR 79.75 42-350 BLACKSTEAD INVSTMNT~ 2332 E APRICOT DR 98.48 2-2140 BLAIR, WILMA 1239 W 2ND ST 58.28 ~-4200 BLAKLEY, CLAUDE 1618 W 8TH ST 70.35 1-2780 BLEVINS, LAURIE 592 NW 15TH ST 91.21 ~2-408 BOBKO, RAYMOND 1836 N GINKGO AVE 93.83 51-506 BOGGIS, CONNIE 731 E 5TH ST 52.19 31-512 aOKMAN, HELEN 1510 STOREY AVE 110.39 ~2-3036 80S10, LAWRENCE 1949 E CHALLIS DR 63.48 74-660 BOSSART, CANDACE 622 W BARRETT ST 53.36 32-1422 BOWER, PETER 527 W WOODBURY DR 60.59 51-3880 BOWLES, BILLIE 403 E 3RD ST 40.55 51-706 BRANDT, LORELI 426 E IDAHO AVE ARR 57.94 l21-178 BREINHOL T, AARON 2648 W BRIDGESTONE CT I 66.29 1-800 BREWER, SID 423 W BROADWAY AVE 48.16 l21-6 BROMET, PAUL 1662 TODD WY 92.05 31-850 BROOKS, STEVE 2306 NW 12TH ST 65.66 f69-1354 BROWN, BOB 1695 E WHITEHALL ST 89.98 69-574 BROWN, JAMES h 660 S RETRIEVER WY 72.09 BROWN, MICHAEL I 74-3264 608 S CANVASBACK WY 83.61 74-3810 BROWN, ROBERT h 020 W WAL TMAN DR 54.59 I ~9-566 BROWNELL,D.R. 1035 E SHEPHERD ST 90.22 31-3306 BRYANT, JAMIE 1015 W KINGSWOOD CT 55.82 33-1852 BUNDY, DOYLE 2486 N LARCHMONT PL 82.09 31-3364 BURGESS, ALLEN 2282 NW 10TH AVE 75.09 34-856 BURGESS, ARLUS 989 E BROWN BEAR CT 99.1 0 2-2722 BURKMAN, JULIA 1425 N CRESTMONT DR 83.54 34-1528 BURTON,RYAN 2865 N WOLVERINE AVE 65.94 i 31-3046 BUTLER, MICKIE 1081 W CHA TEAU DR J 48.87 I 32-928 BYRNE, PHILIP 2320 KENMERE DR I 66.80 74-402 CALLAWAY, LAUREL 733 BARRETT ST I 59.23 31-1274 CALLISON, JAMES 2662 W 12TH ST 78.80 34-1100 CALLISTER, BROCK 1481 E SAGE HEN CT I 48.16 42-1878 CAMPBELL-ADAMS, M 2072 N SEQUOIA PL 112.06 2-1170 CAMPOSAN,KENT 1304 W 1ST 5T 337.84 31-3394 CARROLL, PHILIP 1080 DELMAR DR 70.86 50-354 CARSTENSEN, DENNIS 1416 E CARL TON AVE I 76.07 ~2-1326 CARTER, ADELAIDE 1905 MONACO WY 200.68 31-2252 CASADY, WARREN A h 392 DARRAH DR I 111.62 I I ~-5130 1 I CASPERSON, MAUREEN 11433 W 14TH ST 92.29 ~-334 CAWLEY, ERIC h 911 TRACY CT I 48.16 i I I f42-1140 CHANDLER, ALLAN 11945 E OAKCREST DR 81.37 I 2-4700 CHATTERTON, PAT !1306 W 14TH ST 80.74 74-2850 CHEESBROUGH, JAMES 519 S SPOONBILL AVE 92a22 65-668 CHENEY, ELWOOD 1919 E BLUE TICK ST 53.70 2-1770 CHERRY LANE LNDRYMT 309 W CHERRY LN CALL 665.28 33-4344 CIRELLI, MARK 12557 N LARCHMONT AVE 80.46 3-690 CITY RADIATOR & MFLR 1671 N LINDER RD CALL 230.56 31-790 CLARK, DONN 1304 FAIRWOOD DR 67 ~ 14 21-2 CLIFFORD,JOHN 1602 TODD WY 79.07 31-678 COATNEY, GERALD [2006 NW 12TH ST 94.12 l21-1766 COFFMAN, RICK K 1960 MARIANNA PL 88.64 50-4478 COLEMAN, MICHAEL 532 E PINE AVE 74.63 31-796 COLLINS, LINDA 2239 FAIRWOOD DR 120.74 19-138 CONRAD,ROSS kSS8 N TURNBERRY WAY 53.36 i 7-994 CONTE,ROGER '1767 W GREENHEAD DR 54.59 22-1598 COOPER, DEBBRA K 1747 BEARDON CT 71.14 74-324 COPELAND, VALERIE 694 PENNWOOD ST 103.57 52-170 CORYELL, EARL 41 E FRANKLIN RD 59.23 31-3420 COUCH, JULIA 1012 FAIRWOOD CT 70.48 31-886 COURTNEY, MARY ANN ~410 N LINDER RD 39.66 2-4770 COX, CHRISTI 1430 W 14TH ST 116.54 42-2358 CRANDALL, LARRY 1838 E GREENMEADOW CT 70.86 72-290 CRANE, JOHN 2196 S GULL COVE AVE 57.96 3-16 CRESWELL, STEVE 1784 N ABERNATHY WY 37.47 32-1090 CRINER, LANCE 198 W CHRISFIELD DR 67.84 31-3336 CRYER, JUDITH 811 DELMAR DR 48.16 50-1368 CULVER, WARN V 1131 E 1 ST ST 59.55 1-74 CUNNINGHAM, KATHRYN 118 W BROADWAY AVE 104.22 I 65-384 CURTIS PECK CONST 2386 E THREE BARS DR I 58.28 r- ! 69-542 CURTIS, HAROLD 11872 S RETRIEVER WY 93.52 50-3734 CZARNECKI, CHERYL 1907 N RALSTIN PL ! 100.66 ! 31-3016 DAVIS, HARRY l2217 NW 14TH ST I 83.44 ! 74-1058 DAVIS, NORMA ~O ROSE CIR i 192.39 34-1770 DAVIS, WADE 1933 E CHATEAU DR I 42.97 1 2-904 DECHAMBEAU, JOHN 11000 NW 12TH AVE 48.16 42-418 DECKER, BRIAN 12162 E GRAPEWOOD DR 68.77 ! 3-318 DECKER, KIMERY 1694 N ABERNATHY WY 97.25 69-612 11861 S SWAN AVE I 89.94 DEVANEY, JAMES 34-352 DEWEY, STEVE 1792 JERICHO RD 100.04 2-1960 DICKSON, DONALD 233 W MAPLE AVE 79.47 69-450 DOLAN, MICHAEL .1914 S ELKHOUND AVE 52.76 2-1560 DOMKA, DAVID 11404 W 2ND ST 55.54 4-1604 DOTY, DAVID ~789 W WILLARD ST 107.58 ! 22-788 DOWNING, JOHN 'l2316 W CHATEAU DR 47.69 32-1342 DREGER, RHETT 162 W WOODBURY DR 82.94 22-1412 DUARTE, MARTIN 11803 W MCGLINCHEY ST 73.88 I 34-398 DUNCAN, RICHARD 11164 TORRINGTON CT 73.32 2-5850 DUPEROUZEL, PHilliP A 1406 W CARL TON ST 104.47 2-5010 EARL Y, GEORGE 1536 N LINDER RD 66.22 5-172 EARNHART, KATHLEEN 3992 W THORNE CREEK ARR 123.52 31-198 EDWARDS, ALLAN 1966 NW 13TH AVE 97.81 74-2396 EIGREN, MICHELLE 11057 W LOUISVillE CT 70.30 74-2368 ELDRED, FLOYD 1014 CRESTWOOD CIR 91.38 51-758 ELITE CLEANERS 140 E IDAHO AVE CALL 308.60 50-2 ELLIOTT, TOM 116 E PINE AVE 152.08 50-2232 ELLIS, JOHN 1020 N CRESTLEY AVE 95.18 34-592 ELLIS, TODD 2328 N AMETHYST PL 239.74 22-1634 ERICKSON, EVA 2291 N llNDER RD 40.16 21-2876 ERNESETO, BRIAN 2974 W FOXTROTTER DR 51.24 20-8 EVANS, DON 4349 N QUAKER RIDGE DR 29.14 21-1172 FALK, RICHARD 2375 lEANN WY 1 08~ 15 1-3670 FARRAND, SHELLIE 403 MERIDIAN ST 53.36 2-5890 FElL, KAY 1036 W 15TH AVE 67.77 ~1-1896 FIELD, CHARLES 2586 MISTY DR 83.16 34-2738 FIFE, KIRK 2867 N WREN AVE 63.48 ( 22-1614 FISHER, DONALD 1750 BEARDON CT 72.09 1-1164 FLATEN, ROBERT 48 W IDAHO AVE 114.34 74-3984 FLETCHER, JEFF 726 S LINDER RD 48.16 34-2084 FLORCZY, ALEXANDER III 1758 TEARE AVE 107.34 74-3354 FLOREZ, BARRY 1333 W GANDER DR 58.09 34-552 FOSTER, BRADLEY f2120 N AMETHYST PL 129.79 50-3754 FRENCH, LAWRENCE 1589 E BUCHMAN CT ARR 93.36 ; 22-342 FRY, JOHN 1822 TRACY CT i 77.57 I 34-1176 FRY, LARRY 2572 N BLACK BEAR WY 85.34 3-82 FUHRIMAN, ANNETTE 2268 W JA YTON DR 63.20 21-506 FULK, TRACIE 2846 N QUARRYSTONE WY 114.08 31-2250 GARCIA, ANOTONIO 1382 DARRAH DR 110.33 42-1138 GARDNER, BRENDAN 1905 E OAKCREST DR 58.28 22-476 GARDNER, LAWRENCE .2156 W CHATEAU DR 84.39 32-630 GARDNER, VINCENT ,2070 CRESTMONT DR 104.36 50-1198 GARDOSKI, WilLIAM 1620 E 2 1/2 ST 59.23 74-3248 GARNER, RICHARD 495 S PELICAN WY 106.44 5-738 GARY HICKS CONST. 3601 W FIR CREEK CT 294.67 69-518 GASS,ROBERT 1155 E BORZOI ST 88.71 2-950 GAYTHIWAITE, RITCHIE 1442 W STATE ST 87.81 74-3236 GLASER, MARY 1106 W GREENHEAD ST 70.86 ! 40-414 GLENN JOHNSON HOMES 1866 E SUMMERRIDGE DR 42.91 68-150 GLENN, SHANE 1200 E REDSIDE DR 71.91 2-5140 GOFF, DENNIS 1423 W 14TH ST 85.77 3-812 GOLDSBERRY, KYLE ~41 N OCEAN AVE 80.03 21-2790 GORRINGE, GUY 12520 N CL YDESDALE AVE 70.86 4-1206 GREEN, KEVIN 2511 W FORECAST ST 55.95 33-1836 GREEN, ROBERT 211 E WOODBURY DR 91.03 40-248 GREENFIELD, VICTOR 1686 E SUMMERF ALLS DR 51.85 34-382 GRIMM, ROBERT 1184 E WILLOWBROOK DR 125.04 2-4290 GROSSO, GARY 1234 MAPLE ST ARR 112.11 74-672 GYLLENBERG, KARL 672 W BARRETT ST 92.33 ~-934 HAFER, RUSSELL 12471 W CARL TON ST 54.59 ! ~1-2654 HAINES, TODD 12343 N MORELLO AVE 95.73 ~2144 HALDEN, DARYL 1340 N VINEYARDS AVE 79.34 ~-1 056 HALE, OEWAINE 2023 N GLENFIELD PL 199.68 19-6596 HAM,RUSSELL 3079 N FIRELIGHT PL 78.91 33-1842 HAMMONS, KENNETH 2463 N LARCH MONT PL 58.00 42-3732 HANDLEY, JEREMY 1982 E KAMAY DR 69.63 22-1240 HANSON, JOHN 2194 W RAINFALL ST 95.46 2-906 HARMON, ROBERT K 1215 W STATE ST 61.02 I 42-2356 HARP, GREGORY 11827 E GREENMEADOW CT 1 09.71 2-2350 HARPER, DIANA h26 W WASHINGTON AVE 83.05 I 42-1820 HARRINGTON-BLACK, J 12210 E MEADOWWOOD DR 66.85 51-378 HARRY'S BAR & GRILL ~04 E 1ST ST 650.73 I 31-2218 HART, WilliAM 12664 NW 13TH ST 58.56 ~-5900 HARVEY, llSA M 1104 W 15TH AVE 72.31 31-3036 HASSIS, BENJAMIN 1303 W CHATEAU AVE 86.37 50-4010 HAYES, FRANK 978 N STONEHENGE WY 61 .02 a9-388 HEEB,ROBERT 2036 S SPORTSMAN WY 78.52 ! l21-2912 HENDERSON, DONALD 13021 W FIElDSTREAM DR 93.67 34-1702 HENDRICK, WENDY ~451 N LARK AVE 120.51 I ~O-2016 HENNIG,WAL TER 13780 QUAKER RIDGE DR 452.05 34-1542 HENRY, BRAD 1865 E FINCH CREEK ST 79.32 1-150 HERKSHAN,ENOS 714 W 3RD ST 67.63 74-3118 HERNANDEZ, ROBERT 711 S MUSCOVY AVE 44.85 74-384 HESTER, LL YOD 656 FULMER CT ARR 94.96 a9-1610 HEZEL TINE, RON 1829 SE 5TH WY 120.30 3-126 Hill, W. THOMAS 698 N MINERAL WELLS AV 66.99 ~1-12 HINE, DONALD 1722 TODD WY 98.48 l22-320 HITESMAN, DOLPH 11810 W CHATEAU DR 114.64 ~-852 HODGE, GARY 1915 W 11TH ST 74.22 22-316 HOLADAY, CARY L h 780 W CHA TEAU DR 102.73 ! 5-722 HOLLEY, DAVID 3540 W FIR CREEK CT 68.68 32-1456 HOLLINGSHEAD, BRETT 892 W WOODBURY DR I 64.43 1-4440 HOLSTEIN, WilliAM 870 W FRANKLIN RD 110.68 46-464 HOL TON HOMES 3463 EISENHOWER DR 53.36 65-630 HOME ART CORP 1930 E DOBERMAN DR CALL 48.16 7 -762 HOME ART CORP. 411 S lODESTONE AVE 48.16 51-4250 HOME PRO PLUMBING 508 E BOWER ST 306.12 3-362 HONO,GREG 1903 W SNYDER DR 78.80 50-680 HOOVER, L YND 1320 E 4TH ST 48.16 51-678 HOOVER, L YND 534 E IDAHO AVE I 57.05 51-4214 HOOVER, L YND 323 E BOWER ST 116.15 51-4218 HOOVER, L YND 335 E BOWER ST 96.32 50-678 HOOVER, L YND 1318 E 4TH ST 177.48 ~O-1556 HOOVER,L YND 3420 SUGAR CREEK DR 55.54 31-3458 HOPKINS, DARRYL 2048 NW 9TH PL 63.20 32-458 HORNE, THOMAS 2130 NW 8TH ST 69.35 51-470 HORTON, ROBERT 237 E IDAHO AVE 60.46 74-3966 HOSAC, JAMES 1360 W GANDER DR 54~59 22-216 HOWELL, CHAD 1620 N KASTLE FALLS AV 64.99 50-226 HOWELL, JAMES 234 E STATE AVE 93.42 50-226 HOWELL, JAMES 236 E STATE AVE 93.42 50-2012 HUGHES, DONNA 928 E WENTWORTH ST 74.16 3-76 HULTBERG, JEFFREY 2198 W JA YTON DR 48.16 50-1706 HUNT, STEVE 16 E WASHINGTON AVE I 80.03 3-306 HUNTLEY, JASON ~073 W SNYDER DR 69.47 l21-470 HYVONEN, CLARK 2582 W WHITESTONE DR ! 62.25 i 50-1606 INTEGRITY LLC 1323 E 1ST ST 96.32 l2-5820 JACKSON, ROBERT 1037 W 13TH AVE 67.15 50-4506 JACOBSON, BETTY B 436 E PINE AVE 60.62 31-868 JAKOMEIT, CONNIE L 1338 W CHATEAU DR I 79.19 31-516 JARRETT, SHARON 1542 STOREY AVE 86.85 65-464 JARVIS, DANIEL 1980 E PARTY JET ST 86.46 69-1388 JENKINS, LEROY 12300 SE 5TH WY 113.03 1-3290 JENKINS, LNDON A 802 W 7TH ST 215.48 21-2830 JESSEE, KEVIN 2471 N MAN 0' WAR AVE 77.17 50-4630 JOHNSON, JOSEPH 46 E PINE AVE 1 00.16 50-4562 JOHNSON, STEVEN i238 E PINE AVE 86.46 34-1880 JOHNSTON, SHANNON 2062 N LARK PL ARR 198.69 51-3098 JONES TRUST AGREEMN 47 EKING ST 58.16 51-4290 JONES,BRET ~18 E BOWER ST 145.58 22-330 JONES, ELDON ~312 MONACO WY ~RR 122a53 34-1178 KAHLE, STEPHANIE 12590 N BLACK BEAR WY 80.14 34-812 KAUTZ,KARL 2298 NE 10TH AVE 53.29 3-310 KA YLER, AMANDA 2043 W SNYDER DR 65.66 2-3120 KELLEY, DAVID 1303 W 7TH ST 61.55 34-3190 KELLEY, SCOTT 2929 N BOULDER CREEK 57.49 1-870 KELLODD, J.R. 615 W 3RD ST 48.16 I 22-1172 KEMMISH, SUSAN 2295 W RAINFALL ST 121.57 50-4486 KETTLES, DA VID 520 E PINE AVE 84.56 42-2530 KILER, KELL Y 2031 E LOCHMEADOW CT 112.18 3-298 KING, DAVID 2137 W SNYDER DR ARR 125.16 3-24 KINNEY, KIMIKO 12084 W JA YOTN DR ARR 66.01 I 31-136 KINNEY, RODNEY 11325 W YOST CT 72.37 50-2116 KIRKMAN, T.R. h 356 N STONEHENGE WY 53.36 ! 5-168 KLAPWYK, JACK 13953 W PARK CREEK DR 69.07 34-452 KLUM, ALLAN i 107 N ZIRCON PL 97.53 74-3096 KOPET, DAVID 1075 W EGRET DR 93.35 ~1-3066 KOVACH, MILAN 2960 W JOUST ST 91.21 33-128 KOWLOONS REST. 172 E FAIRVIEW AVE CALL 924.57 2-6030 KRASOWSKI, TOM 11017 W 12TH AVE 77.57 7-260 LAMBSON, MARSHALL 349 S LODESTONE AVE 75.78 22-1244 LAMPKINS, STEVE k262 W RAINFALL ST 96.69 46-504 LANDERS, DIANNA 3553 E FLORENCE DR 52.76 33-4278 LANDON, DONALD 350 E WOODBURY DR 50.54 21-510 LANE, LEX 2870 N QUARRYSTONE WY 127.32 4-1776 LANSING, BUD 2628 W WI LLARD ST 99.95 74-2416 LAPP, MARK 958 W KIMRA ST 41 .92 69-1306 LARRY RICHARDS CONSl 2496 S ABACa WY 76.57 34-1036 LEJARCEQUI, TIMOTHY 1288 E HUNTER DR 143.43 34-928 LEWIES, LINDA 1407 E HUNTER DR 85.06 21-1134 LEWIS, GREGORY 12449 N MAXIE WY 54.97 I 33-2278 LEWIS, RIK l2533 N ARROW WOOD WY 81.26 ! 50-2130 LIKES, JENNIFER 11051 E GRANDBURG CT 58.56 22-1176 LINAZASORO, ROBERT 12251 W RAINFALL ST 63.40 33-3658 LINDSAY-CROTEAU, L 1513 E BALDWIN ST 64.99 32-842 LITTLE, JOHN 689 W WILLOWBROOK DR 69.35 2-458 LLOYD, JOHN 682 W CRITERION ST 103.12 2-1570 LOCK, MICHAEL 1410 W 2ND ST 83.12 42-2520 LOCKYER, JEFFERY 1935 E LOCHMEADOW ST 153.27 5-656 LOFFER,CHRIS 1361 N DEER CREEK PL 87.80 3-98 LOGSDON, BRUCE 659 N TIDWELL WY I 49.93 34-814 LONGWORTH, ERIC 953 E BLUE HERON ST 84.39 20-1584 LOVAN,RICHARD 3728 SUGAR CREEK DR 96.30 21-3134 LOVE, JAMES 2910 N STONE AVE 121 .29 2-402 LUBACKY, ANDREW 1912 NW 7TH AVE I 81.65 32-756 LUCKIE, BRYAN 1116 WWILLOWBROOK DR 64.88 ! 21-2182 LUNA, JUAN 13040 W HIGAN ST 103.01 4-1720 LUNN, GARY 681 W LEONARD ST 53.76 I 21-586 MACISAAC, JAMES 2650 W PEBBLESTONE CT 97 .25 4-1848 MACLENNAN, GIL 1210 N RUTLEDGE AVE 70.67 2-4480 MADRID, JOSEPH F 1224 NORTHGA TE CT I 71.81 21-2180 MANGSY, THIENITA 3026 W HIGAN ST 58.00 34-2808 MANN, KEVIN 1264 E RINGNECK CT 67.35 2-1510 MANWARNING, MARK 1305 W 1ST ST 70.19 4-2016 MARKS, EUGENE 2188 W SUNNY SLOPE DR 129.24 33-1850 MARSHALL, GARY 2472 N LARCHMONT PL 49.78 74-670 MARTINEZ, DIANA 654 BARRETT ST 59.39 21-1878 MARTSON, KELLI 1851 TODD WY 78.94 34-994 MASON, DREW 2592 N SHOVELER WY 110.50 2-4750 MATHIESON, ROBERT JR 1414 W 14TH ST 66.61 4-1626 MAXEY, SHANE ~812 W WilLARD ST 81.93 50-3888 MAXEY, STEFFANIE 1151 N SHIRE AVE 48.16 33-2266 MCBRIDE, KEVIN ~424 N EUREKA PL 98.69 2-5310 MeCA THRON, PENNY 1533 ELM Pl 55.13 ~-450 MCCLURE, BRENT 638 W CRITERION ST 109.94 74-3208 MCCULLOUGH! JIM !644 W GREENHEAD ST 67.17 31-3474 MCDONALD, SHAWN 082 NW 10TH PL i 85.89 f46-326 MCDONOUGH, CASEY bS82 E EISENHOWER DR 84.35 31-3242 MCGOWAN, DAVID E 211 NW 11TH ST 93.56 ! 34-1854 MCGURER, WAYNE 11011 CLAYBOURNE DR I 112a57 51-3246 MCKAUGE, PAUL W 1110 E WilliAMS AVE 89.38 21-62 MCKAY, CINDY ~246 LEANN WY 79a47 74-1024 MCKINLEY, JUNE 54 ROSE CIR 59.51 32-454 MCLEAN, JACK 2094 NW 8TH ST 98.53 42-440 MCLEOD, RUTH 2295 E GRAPEWOOD DR 65.34 50-2444 MCNITT, STEVE 1472 N PENRITH AVE 58.00 74-374 MEDElL, JAYSON ~53 FULMER CT 55.30 l20-1664 MEDLEY,STEVEN 13761 WOODMONT DR t 127.22 50-326 MEEK, JEANNE 327 E CARL TON AVE I 88.41 648 W WOODBURY DR I 32-1438 MENZEL, PAUL I 67.45 52-1 090 MERIDIAN SPEEDWAY b22 E 1ST ST I 30.18 I 1 52-1100 MERIDIAN SPEEDWA Y 1322 E 1ST ST 109.69 ARR ; 21-94 METIVIER, JAMES I 522 N WA TERSTONE WY 64.66 I 21-3130 MIDDLETON, LUCINDA 12854 N STONE AVE 102.73 1-3330 MIGNEAUL T, LESLIE 31 W PINE AVE 60.46 50-1232 MillER, ARVIL 11421 E 2 1/2 ST 90.43 42-2118 I MILLER, JI'M 12287 N WINGA TE PL 88.32 22-1440 MILLER, JOSEPH h749 W HENDRICKS ST ! 62.12 I I 2-3250 MillER, TRACY 1527 W CARL TON AVE 93.96 34-830 MIZE, JIM C !984 E BLUE HERON ST 122.26 ! 34-1540 MONTEFERRANTE, M la47 E FINCH CREEK ST 100.40 3-874 MONTGOMERY, JON 599 N BROWNFIELD WY 69.35 ! 74-1050 MONTGOMERY, VESTA 128 ROSE elR 48.30 50-2098 MOORE, RAY 1291 SANDLIN AVE 55.82 32-816 MOORE, RICK T !322 W WILLOWBROOK DR 134.08 32-804 MORGAN, CHARLES 65 W CREEKVIEW DR 133.93 46-440 MOROPOULOS, CRAIG 13632 E CONGRESSIONAL 57.68 I 32-654 MORRISON, MICHAEL 1473 CRANMER DR 185.81 32-692 MORRISON, MICHAEL 68 CRANMER DR 87.56 ~748 W WHITESTONE CT I 21-1068 MURRAY, JOHN I 96.90 2-1690 ! NASH, E RALPH 11616 W 2ND ST 88.92 2-2150 NEAGLE, lOUIE 1216 CHERRY AVE 154.51 I 69-2302 i NEAL, KEVIN 1242 E CALDERWOOD DR 56.45 65-450 NELSON, MARIL YN h 987 E PARTY JET ST 59.79 I 50-2150 NELSON, RYAN 1966 E WINSLOW ST 141 .02 51-4110 NESMITH, STEVE k7 E BOWER ST 48.16 I 22-1724 NEW CONCEPS DEV. 12020 W PEBBLESTONE ST 48.16 1-3200 NEWKIRK,. MARYANN 847 W PINE AVE 66.61 ! 22-1290 NIGH, MICHAEL 12070 LASHER CT 89.86 2-6380 ! ! NONAMAKER, STEVE j908 W WASHINGTON DR 61 .04 I 31-474 NUIJEN, GERALD !1462 SANDALWOOD DR 266.44 34-1314 O'KEEFE, PA TRICK 634 N SNOW GOOSE WY ARR 236.21 2-5370 I ODOM, SHERRY 11425 ELM PL 110.16 74-2728 OGDEN, DEBRA 11112 CRESTWOOD DR 109.00 33-4516 OKE,DARREN ~551 N VOYAGER AVE 167.34 J I 34-2134 OPAL BLUME TRUST 11071 CLARENE 5T 68.68 I I 50-1918 OSTERHOUT, JUSTIN 11557 N PENRITH PL 70.58 ! I 46-794 OVERSETH,TEENA 11126 N LEGISLATIVE WY 48.24 ! 50-3898 OWEN, KEVIN 11309 E SHELLBROOK DR 85.62 2-2550 PACK, PAUL 11313 W 4TH 5T 61.81 2-2748 PACK, PAUL 11323 W 4TH ST j 244.59 22-1540 PAGE, ALAN 11952 KINGSWOOD CT 119.95 31-3280 PALMER, PAT h 170 W NEWPORT CT 81.19 69-300 PARK, JON ~126 S WEIMARANER WY 68.36 j 31-734 PARKS, RONALD ~207 FAIRWOOD DR 73.60 21-2188 PEL TIER, SEAN 13148 W HIGAN ST 72.37 ! 33-2726 PEL TON, ANDREW 1644 E ADDESON 5T 85.90 65-278 PERRY, DAN 2085 E EASY JET 8T 58.90 ! 72-258 PETERSON, KONNEL 12111 S GULL COVE PL 61.65 74-2616 PETERSON, NOEL 971 W KIMRA ST ARR 47.45 33-2344 PETERSON, RONALD ~40 E WOODBURY DR 64.16 PHILP, HAROLD ! 34-1560 1952 E HAWK ST 110.50 42-1208 PHIMMASONE, P 11951 N DIXIE AVE 60.42 4-1646 PIKE, BRETT 2835 W SHERYL ST 44.80 32-1590 PISCHEL, DEBORAH 866 W CREEKBURY ST 90.29 32-900 PITMAN, DOUGLAS 2320 N KELSEY PL 140.08 22-1564 PITTI, JOHN i1950 T ANA CT I 252.96 42-3086 PLEW, KEVIN 12708 N CHARCERY WY I 69'.63 4-1412 I PLUMLEY, RODNEY 12826 W LEONARD CT 95.18 2-3340 POE, RICHARD h115 W 6TH ST 66.1 0 I 3-376 POEDY, DOUGLAS 1788 N ROT AN AVE 80.17 33~ 1938 POLENSKY,RODNEY 1235 E WOODBURY DR 76.06 22-868 POLLARD, RONALD ~307 N KUBIK PL 181.74 21-1942 POOL, JAMES I 609 REBECCA WY 84.67 ! 3-332 PORTER, DAVID 11979 W SLA TON DR 69.91 21-2604 PORTER, RODNEY 352 N SWAINSON AVE 91 .77 21-1082 POWELL, JON ~773 N FIELDSTONE WY 45.71 19-250 PRECHT,WILLIAM 544 N SEA COVE WAY 59.79 21-492 PRESCOrr HOMES ~835 N OLD STONE WY 42.14 ( /" ( I 2-1940 PREWITT, PHilliP 1307 W MAPLE AVE 72.37 2-2610 PRION, TODD 1464 W PACK AVE 122.77 74-2338 PUCKETT, ROB 184 LYNWOOD CIR 64.15 , 5-264 RADUE,PAUL 1225 N SAW CREEK PL ARR 128.15 I 74-3086 RAINES, DAN ~oo S PELICAN WY 43.70 21-2766 RANDALL, GLENDA 534 N VICTOR WY 123.75 ! 2-5670 RANSOM, JAMES R 11017 W 15TH AVE 65.65 51-890 RAYGOZA, IGNACIO 21 E PINE AVE 92.89 21-3034 RAYMOND BOBKO 13017 W RA VENHURST ST 129.51 32-1390 RECORD, CLAYTON 22 W WATERBURY DR 68.68 I 20-1448 REMINGTON HOMES 12168 N OAK HILLS DR" 62.88 5-720 RENOWN CONSTRUCTIOI 3508 W FIR CREEK CT 81.21 68-102 RENOWN CONSTRUCTIOJ 1429 E TIME ZONE DR I 47.76 33-4578 RHINEHART, DOUG 12553 N RITCHNER AVE 64.02 32-1694 RICE, E DONALD hoD W CLAIRE ST 65.38 ! 42-2138 RICE, JAMES P l2262 N DEVLIN AVE 94.91 46-4484 RICHARDSON LABS 3475 E COMMERCIAL CT 1211.19 31-1062 RIDGEWAY, ROBERT h 223 DARRAH DR 87.41 34-1694 RIDGEWAY, STEPHAN 850 E GROUSE DR 66.61 1-2770 RIGENHAGEN, HAROLD 552 NW 15TH ST 48.16 68-20 RIVADENEYRA, DAREN 12419 S RUBY RAPIDS Pl 49.70 50-2036 RIVERA, KATHY 1957 W WENTWORTH ST 131.27 I 2-1580 ROBERTS, PAUL 11418 W 2ND ST 61.97 34-1034 ROBINSON, KENNETH 465 N ELK COVE WY 117.49 2-970 ROEPKER, DA VID 11419 W STATE ST 84.67 ! 32-570 ROESBERRY, JANICE 630 CRESTMONT CIR 87.69 21-2006 ROSE, MARK 1732 N MORELLO AVE 1 07.54 42-2404 ROSE, PHOEBE 2277 N LOCHNESS WY 54.56 1-4430 ROWLEY, HELEN 1850 W FRANKLIN RD 28.59 74-3238 RULE,DEBRA h 134 W GREENHEAD DR I 69.63 65-318 RUPPERT, RONNIE 002 E EASY JET ST I 62.60 ! 21-1774 RYTHER, GENEVIEVE 11910 TODD WY 74.05 33-2616 SAILORS, GREG 958 N CAPE COD WY 72.37 34-760 SALAS, MARGARET ~215 N ZIRCON AVE 78.80 32-460 SALAZAR, J. AMADOR 785 W WILlOWBROOK DR 132.54 69-776 SANDMEYER, ERIC h670 S BLACKSMITH PL 62.60 5-724 SARGENT, RICHARD 13600 W FIR CREEK CT 89.95 ~78 HANOVER CT ! 74-354 SAUNDERS, MICHAEL 63.20 2-5680 SAXTON, CORY 11007 W 15TH AVE 102.45 22-1386 ! SCHAEFFER, MICHAEL 11933 W SANDALWOOD DR 120.23 ! 32-978 SCHEIDELER, COLETTE 1320 W SPICEWOOD DR 82.60 32-652 SCHLAPIA, SCOTT 51 W WILLOWBROOK DR 77 .29 ! 34-2122 SCHMIDT, GLEN 11920 TEARE AVE 71.14 33-2306 SCHNEIDER, ROBERT 560 E BROWN BEAR ST 105.35 l21-2252 SCHOEN, DANNY 1971 N SWAINSON AVE 59.48 ~2-458 SCHOENFELD, GORDON 2311 MONACO WY 72.76 42-3050 SCHOLZ, LESLIE 11874 E CHALLIS DR 63.48 I I 34-2144 SCHRANK, THOMAS 11841 JERICHO RD 115.59 2-5960 SCHULER, E GAINES 11104 WASHINGTON PL 120&46 ! 32-622 SCHUSTER, BILL 11940 CRESTMONT DR 81.14 1-2260 SCOTT, DAVID !1531 W IDAHO CT ARR 124.58 1-2040 SEAMONS, DOUGLAS l203 W IDAHO AVE 61.02 69-2262 SEDILLO, JOE 11925 S COUNTRY TERRACE 201.57 2-2360 SEINKNECHT, DAVID ~02 W WASHINGTON AVE 74.43 ! 69-1590 SHANNON, JEAN !1706 SE 3RD WY 88.99 [22-1466 SHELDON, MARCUS 1710 W HENDRICKS ST ARR 212.63 34-2048 SHEPERD, CRAIG 1811 N TEARE AVE 81 .54 3-292 SHURTZ~ ROD 2195 W SNYDER DR 51 .96 I 21-208 SILSBY, TERRY ~674 N OLD STONE WY 155.51 ! 22-1504 SIMPSON, RANDY 11764 SANDALWOOD DR 80.03 51-3660 SLAY, LAWRANCE 147 E ADA ST 53.08 21-1066 SMALLWOOD~ NEIL 732 W WHITESTONE CT 70.30 31-2258 SMITCHGER, KIMBERLY 11464 DARRAH DR 155.00 2-1700 1 SMITH, LEON 1125 W CHERRY LN 59.51 ~-1980 SMITH~ MICHAEL ~17 W MAPLE AVE 47.35 ! l21-1782 SMITH, PAUL 12563 JEFFREY CT 51.82 2-6170 SMITH, SHANE 1119 W 11 TH ST 63~ 19 ! 72-166 SMITH, TODD !1930 S COVEY PL 91.77 72-266 SOMAZZI, ROGER 177 W CHRISTOPHER ST 56~45 74-3346 SPELL, MA YNARD 1417 W GANDER DR 49.39 l 51-3580 SPENCER, JOHN R 1126 EKING ST 69.04 34-3316 STADLER, STEPHEN b112 N SHEPHORNE AVE 71 .95 22-1484 STALEY, JAMES 1701 SANDALWOOD DR 155.74 21-502 STANPHILL, CYNTHIA ~818 N QUARRYSTONE WY 85.91 74-2596 STARR, SONI 375 S PENNANT PL 57.91 i 22-1048 STEINER, THURSTON i2054 N GLENFIELD PL 160.71 I 31-1008 STILES, MICHAEL 11481 DARRAH DR 77.01 I 31-3414 STINGER, DA VIO 11053 FAIRWOOD CT 82.49 ! ~2-1380 STORER, GEORGE l2008 MONACO WY 98.58 32-1710 STROEBEL, SEAN 92 W CLAIRE ST 128.59 21-1058 STUBBLEFIELD, MARK j 915 N FIELDSTONE WY I 80.14 50-2186 SUMMERS, WADE 1052 E ASHFORD ST 58.08 65-380 SUTHERLAND, TED ~365 E THREE BARS DR 79.26 69-698 SWOPE, SABRINA 11221 E MASTIFF 112.99 46-4618 TABLE ROCK BREWERY 13550 E COMMERCIAL CT 241.88 I 2-958 TANAKA, TINA 1997 NW 14TH ST 148.79 74-2398 if ARTER, KELL Y 1035 W LOUISVillE CT i 65.38 ! l20-1964 IrECOINVESTMENTS 13951 SUGAR CREEK DR 81.37 33-56 TEL-CAR INC. 1220 E FAIRVIEW AVE 880.85 34-1826 :rHAMES, DA VIO ~161 NE 10TH AVE 58.28 rrH I BADEAU, DANIEL I e1-2082 123997 W STEPHANIE CT 94.68 ~2-1074 IrHOMANN,MARK 11715 E OAKCREST DR 91.37 l2-952 THOMAS, TIMOTHY 1464 W STATE ST 66.77 22-1142 THOMPSON, ERIC 2421 W RAINWATER CT 56.77 21-3048 THORNTON, WilLIAM 12839 W RA VENHURST ST 168.20 3-400 THURBER, RICHARD b74 N TALL PINE AVE 132.94 69-226 TIMA, KAREN ~122 S CHESAPEAKE AVE 76.97 2-4800 TODD, JUDY L 11400 NORTHGA TE AVE ARR 161.01 42-2608 TONEY, RICHARD [23562 N LAUGHRIDGE AVE 75.78 74-2464 TOWN, NEAL 1277 S ASHLEE PL 83.72 [22-1204 IrRAINOR, MARGIE booo N COOL CREEK AVE 84.39 ! 31-2266 ITRAINOR, VINCE 11433 CLAIRE ST I 118.89 20-1492 TRAMPLEASURE,DENNIS 3565 W TUPELO CT 73.88 ! 2-3510 TRA VIS, HANSEN 1431 W WASHINGTON AVE 62.59 20-1838 TUNNICLIFF ,TRENT 3825 SEA ISLAND CT 89.31 50-3824 TURNBAUGH, JAKE !1475 E SOTHESBY ST 51.85 21-1174 TWADDLE, DAVID 492 W CHATEAU DR 92.61 51-302 TWOMEY, MATTHEW k20 E BROADWAY AVE 79.36 ( ( 34-2104 TYLER, HEIDI h 034 TAMMY ST 110.47 31-3406 ULIN, MARY H 11111 FAIRWOOD CT 65.94 74-2879 USSERY, TRACY 1345 W MERGANSER DR 106.98 21-2946 VARNER, GERALD ~895 W FIELDSTREAM DR 82.20 I 21-1032 VELADA, FEDERICO t2956 N FIELDSTONE WY 105.46 2-3550 VIRDEN, MICHAEL k10 W CARLTON AVE 186.93 ! 22-318 VOOREES, MICHEAL 11790 W CHATEAU DR 53.08 31-862 WALKER, BRYCE h 306 W CHATEAU DR ARR 81.62 34-2142 WALKER, BRYCE 11861 JERICHO RD 90.03 31-608 WALKER, MICHAEL 1333 NEWPORT DR 105.75 32-498 WALKER, SHANNON ~059 CRESTMONT DR 68.08 34-2734 WALL, MIKE l2882 N WREN AVE 68.40 4-2132 I WALSTON, DOUGLAS 12015 W SANTA CLARA DR 102.28 ! 31-3388 WATSON, COREY S !1 014 DELMAR DR 87.41 31-2230 WATTERS, TAMI 691 NW 13TH ST 54.59 ! 72-156 WElL, DAVID 12017 S COVEY Pl 114.99 ~O-1774 WESTON,STEPHEN 3732 STANWICH DR 94.67 50-3890 WHIPPLE, JEFF 11125 NSHIRE AVE 46.02 ! 7 -898 WHIPPlE,KEVIN 1376 S lODESTONE AVE 53.08 69-1304 WILDE, KENNETH ~508 S ABACa WY 131 .24 l2-4520 WilliAMS, PATRICIA 1409 W 13TH ST 61.97 1-3360 WilliAMS, PAUL 535 W PINE AVE 115.43 I 51-3094 WilliAMS, TONY 155 EKING ST 82.24 3-4 WI LSON, JAN 6016 W SLATON DR 48.16 51-3330 WilSON, KENT ~OS EKING ST 80.16 50-210 WILSON, MITCHELL D i 1338 S STATE ST E-2 69.26 I 33-3662 WilSON, RANDY !S56 E WAKEL Y ST 69.20 4-1804 I WILSON, STEPHAN l2472 W SANTA CLARA DR 59.51 WINGA TE, DIANE ! 34-1954 1905 E WILlOWBROOK DR 58.91 ! 50-4490 WINTERS, BRIAN 1514 E PINE AVE 48.16 1-2010 WISDOM, RICK S 323 W IDAHO AVE 80.98 ! 32-1560 WOOD, ADRON ~572 NW 8TH ST 37.40 ! ~1-2782 WRIGHT, DUANE ~957 W STALLION ST 60.30 46-838 YORGASON, J RAMON 3898 E FLORENCE DR 76.70 2-424 YOUNG, BRADLEY I 1539 W CRITERION ST 83.19 S0-3740 YOUNG,DARON !938 N SCRIVNER WY 51.85 50-4008 YOUNGBLOOD, JON 1950 N STONEHENGE WY 175.35 50-3784 ZAUALA, JOSE h 137 N SCRIVNER PL 70.97 I 34-800 ZEAR,KENNETH ;998 E CHATEAU 161.37 33-3570 ZOELLER, KA THRYN 424 E EDGAR CT ARR 220.26 22-856 ZOOK, GEORGE }2213 N GLENNFIELD WY 94.52 I 52046.49 ,..-- ( ..... 0:: o a.. w 0::: >- () z w ::> o z ::; w o IlJ ~ o o l- ll: ~ >- LL LL 0 en I- 0) rn ~ <0 CJ) co ......... ex) (J) 0 0:) CO ~ =>> en 5 N <0 iii v ~ ..J ('t) ~ ~ (X) UJ <C ..J 0 C") ~ v ...J 0 0 1.0 0) I'- ~ T- C") <C tn 0 ::>> iL I- =It N ,...... ~ ~ co It) v ~ ..J N 0 ....... CD co (3 ~ I'- Lt) ~ ~ Z en UJ ~ co 0> co v ::>> 0) D:: ~ ('I) ...q v v 0 -... I'- V -.:t 0 <0 co ~ ('f') co C\I C\I V 0 cn It) <0 C") It) 0 0 ..J ..J C\I <C 0 I- 0 C ?- m z iL =It Q) N V V W ~ ....... co v ~ I.() ~ ~ U') LL en C'\I ~ C\I 0 ....... 0> ,...... ,...... I'- ('I) It) ,...... ,...... LL ....... co 0> C") ~ 0> It) (V) co v ('I) tt) ~ 0 co D: ('t) <0 cO T- ~ It) ci 0> ('t) ....... 0 ~ ~ CD j 0> ('I) ~ ~ ~ I'- I'- 0) ....... <0 0> V 0> I- ........ I'- 0> I'- ....... co 0) ('I) v V I'- ('I) I.C) C>> ~ ""'" ..J 0 v ~ co ....... 0) ....... V I'- <0 co ....... It) :I: en 0 ~ ~ ~ 0 ..J ~ en <C c ..J 0 c( U) 0 ........ II) 0 0 ('I) (V) C\I C") It) ....... co :) iL 0=- 0) 0 0> 0) co co Lt) 0 ,...... 0 '" I- =It ~ ~ "'(- ~ ..J In .,- co co v 0 0 v V N co I'- (t) ('t) 0 0 N T""" L() CD "! ~ ('I) ~ L() C\I ~ co It: ..0 N a) co l""- ce 0> ........ Lt) a) 0:) I.{) (t) z co :3 C'\I co C\I m ,...... <J) C\I 0 co 0 0 co ,...... ::>> ~ ('i) f'... (J) &.0 N OJ It) ....... (J) (J) "'d" V f'... 0 ..J 0) <0 co LO ~ 0> V 0 0 v v en co "'" 0 ~ It) v C") ('t) C\I ('t) C"\I ('I) N ('t) ('I) 0 0 en v 0 ..J C l- e( I- 0 V <0 ~ en ~ C\I ('t) ('I) C") 0 C\I C") U) v C") v co co v co r-- (J) ....... C"\I ....... z LL =It ~ ('I) It) ('I) C") ('t) ('t) N C") N V ('f) ~ u.. ('i) It) 0 C\I I'- ....... co <X) 0 0 It) C") co LL (J) ~ 0 co "! (J) co ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ('I) 0 U) 0) It) v co ~ ....... e ..0 Lt) C\I ('I) ,...... 0 ,..... D:: ('f') ~ ~ "'(- ~ C\I V co co co It) C\I co .... en c( ('I) co 0 ~ ...... ....... .,- Lt) ~ N It) V Q) ::) -... ..J co ....... 0) 0 ....... co co ....... It) (0 .,- co v :J: CD ..J .,- T""" ~ 0 en .,- UJ ..J 0 ...J <( C c:( 0 co Lt) ....... v ....... v ('i) co CX) ....... 0 .,- :;) UJ ('f) <0 co ~ to ....... m to Lt) <0 co ....... l- LL =It T- T""" rc ..J ,...... co ....... T""" 'V co (") co <0 ('t) V ex) ('I) (3 N 'II(- "! C\I ,...... 1.0 ~ Lt) 1.0 ~ 0 co CD ...... UJ cO ....... N ~ CD C\I v M C\I 0 0 ci C\I Z en ~ .,- .,- v .,- C") T- ('t) I.t) ex> co v Lt) <0 :;) ....... :5 v It) v L() ....... ~ C\I I'- CX) (J) ....... 0> C\I 0 CD 0 <0 0 ~ I'- V ....... 'Il(- C\I C\I It) OJ ('f) en ..J C\I C\I V .,- C\I ('I) ('I) C\I ('f) ('I) ('f') ('I) 0 ..J 0 ('t) 0 <C c I- (J I- en ('t) It) v v 0> ....... V .,- co 0 'II(- C\I iL ....... C\I co 1.0 0 ...... C\I co 0 t.O 0 V Z :.u: .,- C\I ('I) C\I ('t) ('I) v C\I ('t) ('I) ('I) ('f') ~ '- '- '- ~ Q) Q) Q) ~ ..a t- \... .a ..0 ~ Z Q) E E C1] +"" E ..c co :J ..c UJ Q) 0 0 Q) Q) :J '- 0 ;a Q) >, :J a. :E t) > 0 C .0 \... we C OJ 0 Q) C1] cD as ~ ~ :J ~ Q) 0 Z Cl -:l U. ~ ~ ...., ...., (fJ ( \. ~ ITEM NUMBER: 1 REQUEST: RECOGNITION OF RETIRING VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: )~ CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: JANUARY 5. 1999 APPLICANT: DEPARTMENT REPORTS ITEM NUMBER: 25C REQUEST: BILL GIGRAY - APPROVAL OF RESPONSE LETTER TO THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: CITY WATER DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. COMMENTS Jf1~ turP~ ( To: Gary Smith {,,/ Sheri Stiles Y Tom Kuntz v/ From: Bill G Re: Bureau of Reclamation Date: 12-17-98 RECEIVED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN Attached to this memo is a letter on United States Department of Interior letter head dated the 4th of December, 1998. This is a proposed draft letter in response on behalf of the City. Please review and advise. This matter needs to come before the City Council at the January 5th Meeting. The letter will be addresses as requested in the last paragraph of the letter The following is the official Comment of the City of Meridian as authorized by action of the City Council at their meeting held on the 5th of January, 1998. Please be advised that the City of Meridian has considerable interest in this matter and voices concern about the proposal as it is stated in your letter of November 4th, 1998. First let me address the interest of the City. The City has authority which it is exercising to provide park and recreational amenities throughout the City for its residents ,property owners and its visitors. This area is growing at unprecedented rates. The City is responsible for the regulation and approval of new developmentas well as for the planning for increased demands for park and recreational needs. It is the policy and vision of this City to maximize those features within the City and its impact area that lend themselves to recreational and park use. The City of Meridian and its impact area are traversed by numerous canals, laterals, and drains which are the subject of your letter. The need to develop pedestrian pathways which are separate from heavily traveled highways and streets and which interlink our City park system as well as providing neighborhood recreational opportunities is ever increasing. It is the policy of this City that the type of development above stated is clearly in the best interests of the public and can be accommodated without interference with the needs of the District to maintain facilities for the delivery and drainage of water to its constituents. I am enclosing a copy of the City's plans as it relates to this subject which are entitled [note we need to get some plans to include with this either from Tom Kuntz and or Sheri Stiles} Second I will address the Concern of the City: If the action as proposed occurs without further clarification the City is concerned that its ability to maximize its " ' ( interests as herein stated are in jeopardy. The reasons for this statement is related to the history experienced by City officials when dealing with the agents and officials of the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. It is the perception of this City that Nampa Meridian Irrigation District finds that the development of pedestrian pathways and parkway uses is not in its best interests. The District has shown some flexibility on this point in its negotiations regarding some existing parkways along drainage ways which the City has greatly appreciated and anticipates will continue. The problem is that the District has not shown that flexibility on canals, and laterals and the City anticipates that position will continue. One additional concern is that in the event the action as proposed occurs the District may become even less flexible on this subject. Third The City requests : A. that the Department consider transferring its interest in and to this property to the City upon the Condition that the City would continue to pursue and designate said areas as part of its parks and recreational areas with the further written agreement if the City should determine that portions of the subject area are totally unsuitable for such development that the City would then transfer and assign its interests therein to the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District.; and B as a minimum alternative that any transfer of the Bureau's interest in the subject properties be conditioned upon the Districfs agreement that it will in good faith negotiate with the City of Meridian for an appropriate license agreement {similar in format to the existing license agreement between the District and the City} for the development and maintenance by the City of parkways and pedestrian ways. The City welcomes and requests any opportunity it may have to address its interests, concerns and requests. Dated Signed by Mayor of the City of Meridian CC. Tom Kuntz, Parks and Recreation Director Gary Smith, Public Works Director Sheri Stiles, Planning and Zoning Director Nampa Meridian Irrigation District Ada County Parks and Recreation and Planning and Zoning IN REPLY REFER TO: ( United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Snake River Area Office 214 Broadway Avenue Boise, Idaho 83702-7298 SRA..-6123 December 4, 1998 liltCe Of [' 'If?~h 108 .#J oJ'~"'O.li.s 1/)98 01' ~$tJ;t -'<4'Jllrf~ Subject: Scoping of Issues for Proposed Transfer of Title to Bureau of Reclamation Irrigation and Drainage Facilities to Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District Ladies and Gentlemen: The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is considering a proposal to transfer title to certain Federal irrigation and drainage facilities (canals, laterals, and drains) and associated real property interests to Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID). The facilities and land interests included in this proposal are limited to those facilities which are operated and maintained by NMID, and lie generally within the NMID boundary. A more detailed description of the proposed title transfer is included in the enclosed information. The proposed title transfer would reduce Reclamation's administrative, oversight, and liability burden for facilities that NMID has operated and maintained since they were constructed or improved in the early 1900's. The proposed title transfer is consistent with Reclamation's commitment to a federal government that works better and costs less in support of the goals of . Vice President Gore's National Performance Review. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A) requires Reclamation to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from this action. In order to meet the requirements ofNEP A and to help determine if transfer of these facilities are in the best interest of the public, Reclamation is asking for your assistance in identifying issues and concerns you may have about the proposed title transfer. We invite you to send your written comments on this proposal to the Bureau ofRe ation, Snake River Area Office, 214 Broadway Avenue, Boise, Idaho 83702 by January 15 1998. If you have any questions concerning the proposal or the NEP A process, please contac teve Dunn at (208) 334-9844. I '1 q~ ? Enclosures .~ (' PROPOSED ACTION TRANSFER OF TITLE TO IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES TO NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRlGA TION DISTRlCT Background Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) is an irrigation district organized and existing under the laws of the state of Idaho. NMID diverts water from the Boise River into a system of canals and laterals for delivery to lands in Boise, Meridian, and Nampa, Idaho. The boundaries ofNMID are shown in the attached maps. In the early 1900's the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), extended or enlarged some ofNMID's irrigation facilities to deliver Boise Project water to lands served by the Boise Project. Reclamation also constructed certain drains to provide drainage of irrigated lands and an additional water supply for lands within NMID. Reclamation holds title, on behalf of the United States, to the portions of irrigation facilities it enlarged or extended and drains it constructed. In addition to the facilities themselves, Reclamation also obtained certain land interests necessary to construct, improve, enlarge, and maintain these irrigation and drainage facilities. Most of these land interests consist of ~asements reserved in the name of the United States by the Act of August 30, 1890. This Act reserved rights-of-way for ditches and canals constructed by the authority of the United States on land not patented prior to 1890. In other locations, Reclamation acquired recorded easements or the land in fee title. Since Reclamation had no involvement in many NMID facilities, and was only involved in parts of others, the resulting ownership offacilities and land interests is mixed within NMID. (See attached maps.) NMID first began maintaining the newly constructed and improved facilities under a contract with Reclamation in 1909, and has, through a series of subsequent contracts and amendments, continued to operate and maintain all Reclamation facilities within the NMID boundary that serve their patrons. Some Reclamation facilities within NMID's boundaries serve patrons outside NMID and are operated and maintained by other entities. Reclamation's Title Transfer Initiative Many of Reclamation's projects were constructed in the early 1900's before much of the West was settled and there were no local communities and utilities. Reclamation owns facilities, that if located in other parts of the country, would be owned, operated, and funded by publicly operated private corporations or local government agencies. While it has been Reclamation's policy for decades to transfer operation and maintenance of projects to local entities where and when appropriate, interest in the actual transfer of title (with its attendant responsibilities) is now growing. In 1995, as part of Vice President Gore's National Performance Review, and with the goal of a Federal government which works better and costs less, Reclamation began a program to transfer title offacilities not identified as having national importance and whi~h could efficiently and effectively be managed by non-Federal entities. Reclamation's "Fraineworkfor the Transfer of Tit/e" (Framework) outlines ce~in criteria that must be met prior to implementing any transfer of title action. Key elements of that Framework are: ,'" ( I) The Federal Treasury and thereby the taxpayers' financial interests must be protected. 2) There must be compliance with all Federal and State laws. 3) Interstate compacts and agreements must be protected. 4) The Secretary oflnterior's Native American trusts responsibilities must be met 5) Treaty obligations and international agreements must be fulfilled. 6) The public aspects of the projects must be protected. Reclamation's aim is to transfer title directly to project beneficiaries where these entities are competent to manage the facilities and are willing and able to fulfill legal obligations associated with taking ownership of those facilities. Reclamation believes that NMID meets these requirements and is a good candidate for title transfer. Purpose and Need for Action NMID is located in an area experiencing rapid urbanization. With facilities located in an area such as this there has been a considerable increase in the number of requests to encroach upon or modify facilities within NMID. Currently, Reclamation and NMID each review and respond to requests affecting Reclamation-owned facilities or related land interest. Reclamation normally requests NMID's formal approval since NMID operates and maintains these facilities and knows what specific requirements are needed. This administrative process is a burden to both Reclamation and NMID, as well as the applicant. The transfer of title of the United States' interest in these facilities to NMID would completely divest Reclamation of the responsibility for the operation, maintenance. management, regulation of, and liability for the facilities. It would streamline administrative processes for Reclamation. NMID and the public and allow Reclamation to use its resources more effectively in other areas of water resource management while still ensuring the irrigation facilities within NMID will continue to function properly. The Proposed Action The Proposed Action is for Reclamation to transfer all right, title. and interest in certain irrigation and drainage facilities and associated land interests to NMID. The facilities to be transferred are only those currently operated and maintained solely by NMID and lie generally within the NMID boundary as indicated on the attached maps. The facilities include canals, laterals, and drains that were constructed, extended, or enlarged by Reclamation and the associated easement and fee title land interests held by Reclamation and shown on the attached maps. Title to major facilities, water rights, or storage rights held by the United States, that are affiliated with the Boise Project, are not being considered for transfer. Reclamation does not currently have the authority to transfer title to these facilities and lands. Specific legislation would need to be passed by Congress. If the decision is made to proceed with the title transfer, NMID would draft legislation with provisions that are consistent with Reclamation's 1995 Framework for Title Transfer, and, where appropriate, environmental commitments made by Reclamation through the National Environmental Policy Act process. t.. ( PROPOSED TRANSFER OF TITLE TO IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES TO NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT CHECK BOX IF YOU WISH TO REMAIN ON THE MAILING LIST o RETURN THIS FORM TO: Mr. Steve Dunn, Bureau of Reclamation, Snake River Area Office, 214 Broadway Avenue, Boise, Idaho 83702. PLEASE PRINT DATE NAME STREET OR P.O. BOX CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE COM1\1ENTS: JUSTIN P. AYLSWORTH JULIE KLEIN FISCHER WM. F. GIORAY, III D. SAMUEL JOHNSON WILLIAM A. MORROW CHRISTOPHER S. NYE PHILIP A. PETERSON STEPHEN L. PRuss ERIC S. ROSSMAN TODD A. ROSSMAN R. STEPHEN RUTHERFORD TERRENCE R. WHITE WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE, SUITE 31 POST OFFICE BOX 1150 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83680..1150 TEL (208) 288..2499 FAX (208) 288#2501 NAMPA OFFICE 104 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH POST OFFICE BOX 247 NAMPA, IDAHO 83653#0247 TEL (208) 466#9272 FAX (208) 466#4405 PLEASE REPLY TO MERIDIAN OFFICE January 20, 1999 RECEIVED JAN 2 1 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN William G. Berg, Jr. Meridian City Clerk 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: TODD MASON D/B/A MOXIE JAVA (CUP) Dear Will: Pursuant to City Council action of January 19, 1999, I have prepared the revised FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, (taking out 1.1 under the Decision and Order and renumbering), and the revised ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, (taking out 1. under the conditions and renumbering), in the application of Todd Mason, regarding Moxie Java. The Order is now ready for the Mayor's signature and after the Mayor's signature has been secured, and the City Clerk's signature secured, the original should be retained by the City Clerk. Copies of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order Granting Conditional Use Permit Subject to Conditions and the Order of Conditional Approval of Conditional Use Permit should be served upon the Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public Works Department, as designated by the City Clerk's signature. If you need further assistance by this office, please advise. WFG/msg Enclosure msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Findings2\Ltr to Clerk on FFCL and Order of Approval of CUP for Todd Mason Moxie Java.BK! BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCil IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND TODD MASON D/B/A MOXIE JAVA, 106 E. ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW WilliAMS, FOR A CONDITIONAL USE ) AND DECISION AND ORDER PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING, ) GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS This matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on the 15th day of December, 1998, and the 5th day of January, 1999, and Jennifer Donlon having appeared and testified in favor of the application and no one appearing in opposition, and the City Council having received the staff report and the record made before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and being fully advised in the premises, the Council finds and concludes as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearings on the conditional use permit were published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the said public hearings scheduled for December 15, 1998, and January 5, 1999, 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 hearings FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TODD MASON / MOXIE JAVA - I 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 December 15, 1998, and January 5, 1999, public hearings; and the Applicant, affected property owners, and government subdivisions providing services within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian, having been given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence. 2. There has been compliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code SS67-6509 and 67-6512; and S~11-2-416E and 11-2-418E as evidenced by the Affidavit of Mailing, and the Affidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. The property is located at 106 East Williams, Meridian, Idaho. 4. The owners of record of the subject property are Jerry A. Moore and Cynthia B. Moore of 4419 Vermillion, Boise, Idaho. 5. Applicant is T JBJ, Inc. of 1800 N. Locust Grove #E, Meridian, Idaho. 6. The subject property is currently zoned Old Town (OT). The zoning district of the Old Town (OT) is defined within the City of Meridian Zoning and Development Ordinance, Section 11-2-408(12). 7. The proposed application requests a conditional use permit for two (2) tables to be placed directly outside of and to the left and right of the north-end entrance door of the subject building. The OT zoning designation within the City of Meridian FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TODD MASON / MOXIE JAVA - 2 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 11-2-409). 8. The use proposed within the subject application will in fact, constitute a conditional use as determined by City Policy. 9. The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission takes note of and recognizes the concerns of St. Vincent de Paul of 213 E. 15t Street, Meridian, Idaho, dated November 6, 1998. 10. Given the absence of a Design Review Committee, and the fact that some outdoor seating arrangements are not desirable due to safety and pedestrian walkway concerns, the Planning & Zoning Department processes all outdoor seating applications as Conditional Use Permits. 11. The proposed use will constitute a conditional use as prescribed in the zoning Ordinance. Ordinance No. 11-2-407.D. (Uses Not Specifically Permitted Or Listed in Districts) also states that "all uses in the Old Town District have been stated as Conditional Uses." 12. To maintain compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, the project should be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing and intended character of the general vicinity and that such intended conditional use will not change the essential character of the requests that any approved tables and chairs not be constructed of resin or other low quality materials. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TODD MASON / MOXIE JAVA - 3 ( Applicant should maintain a high quality in the appearance and orderliness of approved furniture. 13. The lack of a designated pedestrian crosswalk from the existing building to the proposed seating area presents a safety concern, especially given that the driveway customers would cross also serves as the driveway entry to the service window. 14. The plan does not reflect a ramp or curb cut to allow handicap access to the proposed seating area. 15. City Council adopts as its Conclusions of Law the Recommendations 1.6 through 1.10 of the Recommendation to City Council made in the above entitled matter by the Planning and Zoning Commission which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. City Council adopts as its Conclusions of Law the Recommendations 1.6 through 1.10 of the Recommendation to City Council made in the above entitled matter by the Planning and Zoning Commission which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 2. Idaho Code S 67-6512 provides in part that: (A) As part of a zoning ordinance the City Council may provide for the processing of applications for special or conditional use permits; and (8) That a special use permit may be granted to an applicant if the proposed use is otherwise prohibited by the terms of the zoning FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TODD MASON / MOXIE JAVA - 4 ordinance, but may be allowed with conditions under specific provisions of the zoning ordinance, subject to the ability of political subdivisions, including school districts, to provide services for the proposed use, and when it is not in conflict with the plan; and (C) That upon the granting of a special use permit, conditions may be attached to a special use permit, including, but not limited to, those: 1 ) Minimizing adverse impact on other development; 2) Controlling the sequence and timing of development; 3) Controlling the duration of development; 4) Assuring that development is maintained properly; 5) Designating the exact location and nature of development; requiring the provision for on-site or off-site public facilities or services; requiring more restrictive standards than those generally required in an ordinance; requiring mitigation of effects of the proposed development upon service delivery by any political subdivision, including school districts, providing services within the planning jurisdiction. 3. Idaho Code S 67-6504 provides that the City Council may exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code which Act is known as the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975." FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TODD MASON / MOXIE JAVA - 5 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. The applicant is granted a conditional use permit for two (2) tables to be placed directly outside of and to the left and right of the north-end entrance door of the subject property and subject to the following terms and conditions: 1.1 Temporary signage, banners, etc., are specifically prohibited. 1.2 The tables and chairs cannot block the exit doors and pathways. 1.3 The Applicant maintain a 5 foot minimum for a walk way. 1 .4 Outside seating must be located immediately to the north of the existing building and limited to two tables. 2. That the City Attorney draft an Order Granting Conditional Use Permit in accordance with this Decision, which shall be signed by the Mayor and City Clerk and then a copy served by the Clerk upon the applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department, the Public Works Department and any affected party requested notice. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TODD MASON / MOXIE JAVA.. 6 NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the conditional use permit 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 January 5, 1999. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED r- COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED ~ COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED ~ MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAICER) VOTED MOTION: APPROVED:~ DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning a~~ Zoning Department and the Public \\\\\u 111111/1 Works De artment. ",,\\:. OF MEFt/IIIII" ~ ~~~~~4\~/q-91 ~ ~ SEAL ~ msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\FindingS\COnd~Onal ~Permits FF\~ N TOpD MOXIE JAVA OUTSIDE SEATING FFCL AND ORDER GRANTING CUP~1~9~6tt"'r <If! " -0.2 ~ 0- 15' · X~ ~ "'''''/ :.; Q "9 '1f ,~ FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIOKf'S>~,9~ · \\\\\", AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING C()Wb\1I()NAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TODD MASON / MOXIE JAVA - 7 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATIER OF THE APPLICATION OF ROBERT F. BEEDE, 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD, FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.2 ACRES FOR INTERMOUNTAIN PET HOSPITAL, MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS This matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on the 15th day of December, 1998, and applicant, Robert F. Beede, appearing, and the City Council having received the staff report and the record made before the Planning and Zoning Commission and being fully advised in the premises the Council finds, concludes and orders as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT I. A notice of public hearing on the annexation and zonIng was published for two (2) consecutive weel<.s prior to said public hearing scheduled for December 15, 1998, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and \Witten notice having been mailed to property ovvners or purchasers of record within three hundred (300') feet of the external boundaries of the property under consideration more FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 1 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS 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 weel, 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 December 15, 1998, 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 conunents and submit evidence. 2. There has been cOlnpliance with all notice and hearing requirements set forth in Idaho Code S9 67-6509 and 67 -6511; and S9 11-2-416 and 11-2-417 of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian as evidenced by the Mfidavit of Mailing, and the Mfidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting field with the staff report. 3. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact numbers 1 through 27, of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Recommendation to City Council made in the above entitled matter by the Planning and Zoning Commission which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length, with the exception that Finding of Fact no. 19.2 to read as follows: " 19.2 Detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant for any improvelnel1t upon the subject property to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Comlnission. All City Ordinances will have to be complied with." FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 2 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City Council adopts as its Conclusions of Law those Conclusions of Law numbers 1 through 21 of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Recommendation to City Council made in the above entitled matter by the Planning and Zoning Commission which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length, vvith the exception that Conclusion of Law no. 19 c. to read as follows: " 19 c. Detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant for any improvements upon the subject property to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Comlnission. All City Ordinances vvill have to be complied vvith." 2. Idaho Code S 67 -6511 provides in part that: The zoning districts shall be in accordance vvith the adopted plan; and that particular consideration shall be given to the effects of any proposed zone change upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services, including school districts, vvithin the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian. 3. Idaho Code S 67 -6511 (d) provides that in the event the City Council adopts a zoning classification pursuant to the request of the applicant based upon a valid, existing Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City, the City Council shall not subsequently reverse its action or otherwise change the zoning classification of the subject real property vvithout the consent in writing of the current property owner for a period of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 3 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS four (4) years from the date of the granting of the applicant's request for zoning of the subject real property. 4. Idaho Code S 67 -6504 provides that the City Council may exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code which act is IG10wn as the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1 975. " 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. The applicant prepare the legal description for the annexation of the subject real property. 2. The City Attorney prepare for consideration by the City Council the appropriate ordinance for the annexation and zoning designation. 3. Detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant for any improvement upon the subject real property to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and which plans shall be complied with as follows: 3.1 Subject to approval of an appropriate waiver, any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing or adjacent to the property shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. The ditches to be piped should be shown on the site plans. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 4 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with vvritten confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public W orl(s Department. The I(ennedy Lateral runs across the southern boundary of the site. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. If the new tiling ordinance was in effect at this time, use of the ditch as an amenity could be considered. 3.2 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7 -517 . Wells may be used for non-dolnestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3.3 Sanitary sewer service to the proposed site is not currently available by gravity flow. Septic service should continue until municipal services are available to the subject site. Septic system upgrade to be approved by the Central District Health Department. 3.4 Water service to the site will be via an extension of the existing main in Overland Road. Applicant will be required to construct the water main across the frontage of this site. Design and routing need to be coordinated with the Public Works Department. Applicant to provide the Public Works Department with information on anticipated fire flow and domestic water requirements for the proposed site. 35. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are determined during the building plan review process. Applicant shall be required to enter into an Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian. In addition to these assessments, water and sewer "Late Comers" fees may also be assessed against this parcel to help reimburse the parties responsible for installing the water main to its current point. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 5 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS 3.6 A Certificate of Zoning Compliance will be required prior to submitting applications for building permits. All new construction shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 3 . 7 Provide roadway and roadway approaches, developments and improvements to be approved by the ACHD. 3.8 Overland Road is designated as an entrance corridor to the City of Meridian. A minimum 35-foot-wide landscape setbacl<. beyond required right-of-way needs to be provided. Landscaping plans will need to be coordinated with Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. 3.9 A development agreement may be required as a condition of annexation. In lieu of a development agreement, detailed site plans could be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council for approval, if desired. All City ordinances will have to be met. 3.10 Provide that the easement on the I(ennedy Lateral is 55 feet; 20 feet to the left and 35 feet to the right facing downstream. If any encroachments occur they must be covered under a license agreement with the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. 3.11 All City Ordinances will have to be complied with. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 6 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please ta](e notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of the annexation and zoning may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seel( a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held January 5, 1999. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED~ VOTED COUNCILMAN ANDERSON COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE COUNCILMAN BENTLEY MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAI<ER) MOTION: 11 n _ APPROVE DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public W or1<.5 Department. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 7 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS By: Dated: /- ~-~? msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Findings3\Annexation and Zoning FF\ORDER for Beede AZ 1.2 acres.wpd RECElVBD JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 8 AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE ) APPLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA ) JENNISON FAMILY TRUST BY ) THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED ) AGENT, TONY HICI<EY, EAST OF ) 603 PINE, FOR ANNEXATION ) AND ZONING OF 2.84 ACRES ) FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARI( SUBDIVISION, MERIDIAN, IDAHO FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS This matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on the 15th day of December, 1998, and JilTI Howard of J.J. Howard Engineering having appeared and testified in favor of the application and no one appearing in opposition and the City Council having received the staff report, and the record made before the Planning and Zoning Commission, and being fully advised in the premises the Council finds and concludes as follows: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. A notice of a public hearing on the annexation and zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weel(s prior to the said public hearing scheduled for December 15, 1998, before the City Council, the first publication appearing and written notice having been Inailed to property owners or purchasers of record within three hundred FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY HICKEY DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - 1 (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 lTIOre than one weelc 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 December 15, 1998, 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 9967-6509 and 67-6511; a11d 9911-2-416 and 11-2-417 of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian as evidenced by the Mfidavit of Mailing, and the Mfidavit of Publication and Proof of Posting filed with the staff report. 3. The City Council adopts as its Findings of Fact those Findings of Fact numbers 1 through 26 of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Recommendation to City Council made in the above entitled matter by the Planning and Zoning Commission which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON F AMIL Y TRUST / TONY HICKEY DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - 2 4. The City Council adopts as a Finding of Fact, Conclusion of Law no. 6 of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Recommendations to City Council Inade in the above entitled matter by the Planning and Zoning Commission which is incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City Council adopts as its Conclusions of Law those Conclusions of Law numbers 1 through 5 and 7 through 1 7 as are set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Recommendation to City Council made in the above entitled matter by the Planning and Zoning Commission which are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth at length. 2. Idaho Code S 67-6511 provides in part that: The zoning districts shall be in accordance with the adopted plan; and that particular consideration shall be given to the effects of any proposed zone change upon the delivery of services by any political subdivision providing public services, including school districts, within the planning jurisdiction of the City of Meridian. 3. Idaho Code S 67-6511(d) provides that in the event the City Council adopts a zoning classification pursuant to the request of the applicant based upon a valid, existing Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance of the City, the City FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY HICKEY DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - 3 Council shall not subsequently reverse its action or otherwise change the zoning classification of the subject real property without the consent in writing of the current property owner for a period of four (4) years from the date of the granting of the applicant's request for zoning of the subject real property. 4. Idaho Code S 67-6504 provides that the City Council may exercise all of the powers required and authorized by Chapter 65 of Title 67 Idaho Code which act is IG10wn as the "Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975." DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION 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: 1. That the applicant prepare the legal description for the annexation included in the application with legal description and submit an annexation permit or legal description for the proposed site as set forth hereinabove. 2. That the City Attorney shall prepare for consideration by the City Council the appropriate ordinance for the annexation and zoning designation. The (R-8) Medium Density Residential District shall not be finally approved by the City Council until provisions of parts 1 and 3 of this order have been met; and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXA TION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY HICKEY DUL Y AUTHORIZED AGENT - 4 3. Developer 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: 3.1 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 3.2 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3.3 Provide 5' wide sidewall<.s in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606B. 3.4 Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street names. Mal(e any corrections necessary to conform. 3.5 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Public Worl(s Department. 3.6 Indicate on the final plat map any FEMA Flood Plains affecting the area being platted, and detail plans for reducing or eliminating the boundary. 3. 7 Sanitary Sewer service to this site will be via and extension from the existing trunk main that traverses along Five Mile Creel(. Applicant will be responsible to construct the sewer lnains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public W orl(s Department. Sewer manholes are to be provided to l(eep the sewer lines on the south and FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY HICKEY DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - 5 west sides of the centerline. Applicant proposes extending a private sewer main into the project in a dedicated easement. The City of Meridian will not own or maintain this line from the manhole in Idaho Street north. 3.8 Water service to this site will be via 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. 3.9 The temporary turnaround shall be constructed to ACHD design criteria, including, but not limited to HS25 loading requirements for pavement design. Subdivision designer can contact Bruce Frecldeton in the Public W orl<5 Department for geometric requirements. 3.10 The preliminary plat indicates several open ditches within or adjacent to the subdivision boundary, however no existing ditch easements are shown. Show any existing easements of record. 3.11 Developer shall be responsible for payment of assessments, and the actual physical connection to the municipal sewer and water system, of the existing hOlne located on Lot I, Block I. Fees are to be paid prior to signature of City Engineer on the final plat. 3.12 Applicant has to indicate whether the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association or the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. If the system is to remain a private homeowners association system, plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the Public W orl<5 Department as part of the development plan review process. A draft copy of the pressurized irrigation system 0 & M manual must be submitted prior to plan approval. The City of Meridian requires that pressurized irrigation systems be FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXA TION AND ZONING APPLICA TION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY HICKEY DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - 6 supplied by a year round source of water. If a creel( or well source is not available, a single point connection to the culinary water system shall be required. If a single point connection is utilized, the developer shall be responsible for the payment of assessments for the common areas prior to signature on the final plat by the Meridian City Engineer. 3.13 Submit a master street drainage plan for the project, including method of disposal and approval from any affected drainage distri ct. 3.14 The Applicant shall provide inforlTIation sufficient to determine the highest normal ground water elevation (sustained), that could be expected on the project site. 3.15 Roadway and roadway approaches to be approved by the ACHD. 3.16 100 watt high pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the Public W orl(5 Department. All street lights shall be installed, at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. 3.1 7 Due to the fact that this subdivision is on a collector street that is expected to carry high volumes, a 20-foot-wide planting strip is required. The planting strip should be extended across Lot 1, Blocl( 1, with a consistent plan, which will be reviewed for approval prior to signature on the final plat. Setbacks for the lots that have not been built on should be determined from the landscape setbacl( line. 3.18 The minilTIUm residential house size is 1301 feet, exclusive of garages, as determined by the Uniforlll Building Code. Entrance or porch areas, breezeways, or patios may not be included as part of the square footage. Revise covenants to comply with City Ordinance. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY mCKEY DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - 7 3.1 9 Application for variance from the mlllimum frontage requirement of 65 feet must be approved. 3.20 Applicant prepare the legal description for the annexation included in the application with legal description and submit an annexation permit or legal description for the proposed site as set forth hereinabove. 3.21 Applicant enter into a development agreement that provides that in the event the conditions herein are not met by the developer that the property shall be subject to de-annexation, with the City of Meridian which provides the conditions of the development as set forth hereinabove. 3.22 The Central District Health Department will approve this project with written approval from the appropriate entities submitted in regards to the central sewage and central water. Plans for the central sewage and central water must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LA W AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY HICKEY DUL Y AUTHORIZED AGENT - 8 NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please tal<.e notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian, pursuant to Idaho Code s 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by this Final Decision and Order and 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 January 5, 1999. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED~ VOTED COUNCILMAN ANDERSON COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED F- MAYOR ROBERT D. CORRIE (TIE BREAI<ER) VOTED MOTION: APPROVED: ~ .. -"". DISAPPROVED: Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public W orles D artment. B' Dated: I-~-~r msg\D:\MyFiles\Meridian City File\Findings3\Annexation and Zoning Ff\Oliason AZ FF for City Council Street Frontage.wpd FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING ANNEXATION AND ZONING APPLICATION SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS VIRGINIA JENNISON FAMILY TRUST / TONY HICKEY DULY AUTHORIZED AGENT - 9 RECEIVED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN ( I JUSTlN P. AVLSWORTH JULIE KLEIN FISCHER WM. F. GIORAV, III D. SAMUEL JOHNSON WILLIAM A. MORROW CHRISTOPHER S. NVE PHILIP A. PETERSON STEPHEN L. PRUSS ERIC S. ROSSMAN TODD A. ROSSMAN R. STEPHEN RUTHERFORD TERRENCE R. WHITE WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE, SUITE 31 POST OFFICE BOX 1150 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83680..1150 TEL (208) 288#2499 FAX (208) 288..2501 NAMPA OFFICE 104 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH POST OFFICE BOX 247 NAMPA, IDAHO 83653#0247 TEL (208) 466#9272 FAX (208) 466#4405 Email viaInternet@wfg@wppmg.com PLEASE REPLY TO MERIDIAN OFFICE January 13,1999 RECEIVED .JAN 1 4 1999 William G. Berg, Jr. Meridian City Cleric 33 E. Idaho Meridian ID 83642 Cit~.r of Meridian City Clerk Office Re: Maws Addition No. 3 Dear Will: Pursuant to City Council action of January 5, 1999, I have prepared the Findings and Order of Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat in the application of Maws Limited Partnership, regarding the above matter. This document is now ready for the Mayor's signature and after the Mayor's signature has been secured, and the City Cleric's signature secured, the original should be retained by the City Cleric. Copies should be served upon the Applicant, the Planning and' Zoning Department and the Public Worl'-S Department, as designated by the City ClerIc's signature. If you need further assistance by this office, please advise. Very trol): ours, Enclosure ey/Z:\Govemmental Municipal\ W ork\,M\rv1eridian 15360M\MawsPPlatClk.ltr BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN IN THE MAlTER OF THE REQUEST ) FOR PRELIMINARY PlAT FOR MAWS ) ADDITION NO. 3 BY TEALEY'S ) LAND SURVEYING ) ) ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF lAW AND ORDER OF CONDI- TIONALAPPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PlAT The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on the 5th day of January, 1999, and appearing at the hearing on behalf of the applicant was Patricl<:. Tealey, Tealey's Land Surveying, and the City Council having received a report from Shari Stiles, the Planning and Zoning Administrator, and the City Council having received as part of the record of this matter the recommendation to City Council of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the applicant having submitted the latest Preliminary Plat Drawing dated: January, 1998, Project No. 972-3 of the Preliminary Plat of Maws Addition No.3 by Tealey's Land Surveying, submitted for preliminary plat approval and which preliminary plat for approval application is herein received and adjudged by the City Council pursuant to Section 11-9-604, Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. Therefore the City Council mal<:.es the following findings: FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - MAWS ADDITION NO.3 - 1 FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan by reason of the fact that it lies within the existing Urban Area as defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan Generalized Land Use Map, Infrastructure Planning Analysis Comprehensive Plan and Map, adopted December 21, 1993 and, the property is presently zoned R-8, Medium Density Residential District, and requires connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer System. [see Section 11-2-408B(7), Municipal Code of the City of Meridian.] 2. The preliminary plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance No. 629. 3. It is determined that Urban Services can be made available to accommodate the proposed development if the plat complies with the requirements and conditions hereinafter set forth as conditions of preliminary plat approval. 4. The proposed development is a continuity of the proposed development within the City's Capital Improvement Program and if the conditions which are requested by the ACHD and as proposed by the developer as stated on the preliminary plat there will be public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development. 5. The development if built in accordance with the conditions and as proposed, will not create health, safety or environmental problems and there have FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT .. MAWS ADDITION NO.3 - 2 been no specifics of any such concerns brought to the Council's attention. 6. It is found that the recommendation to City Councilor the Planning and Zoning Commission is reasonable and appropriate for the conditions of approval of the preliminary plat with a modification of the condition 1.21 as hereinafter set forth. 7. The applicant has submitted for consideration of this approval drawing of the preliminary plat herein designated as: "January, 1998, of the Preliminary Plat of Maws Addition No.3, Project No. 972-3, by Tealey's Land Surveying." DECISION AND ORDER Pursuant to the City Council's authority as provided in Section 1 1-9- 604E of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and based upon the above and foregoing Findings of Fact which are herein adopted IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND THIS DOES ORDER 1. The Preliminary Plat of the applicant as evidenced by January, 1998, of the Preliminary Plat of Maws Addition No.3, Project No. 972-3, by Tealey's Land Surveying. hereby conditionally approved; and 2. The conditions of approval are as follows to-wit: Planning and Zoning Administrator and Assistant City Engineer Recommendations as follows: 2.1 Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9- FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - MAWS ADDITION NO.3 - 3 605aMa Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public W orl<.5 Departmenta No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this project. 2.2 Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non- domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 2.3 Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Public Works Department. Fire hydrant locations shall be depicted on the preliminary plat map. 2.4 Sewer and water mains shall be extended to and through the proposed development. 2a5 Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with street development plans. 2a6 Provide five-foot-wide sidewall<.s in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 2a 7 Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic analysis by our computer model. 2.8 Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street namesa Mal(e any corrections necessary to conform a 2a9 Indicate any existing FEMA Flood Plain Boundaries on the Preliminary Plat Map, and/or any plans to reduce said boundaries. 2.10 Sanitary sewer service to this site will be via an extension of the existing main in Danbury Fair Subdivisiona Approval of this application needs to be contingent upon our ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage generated by this proposed FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - MAWS ADDITION NO.3 - 4 developmente 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 W orles Departmente Sewer manholes are to be provided to l(eep the sewer lines on the south and west sides of centerlinee Applicant to worl, with staff on termination of sewer adjacent to Lot 27. 2e 11 Water service to this site will be via extensions of existing mains installed in Danbury Fair Subdivision and adjacent in E. Pine Avenuee 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 W orl<.5 Department. 2e 12 One hundred-watt, high-pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the Public W orl($ Departmente All streetlights shall be installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. 2e 13 A detailed landscape plan for the common areas shall be submitted for review and approval with submittal of the final plat mape A letter of credit or cash surety will be required for the improvements prior to signature on the final plate 2.14 The design of the drainage area shall ensure that water is retained only during major storm events for a maximum 24-hour period. The City has been experiencing problems with groundwater in drainage areas, particularly those without an outflow to an existing drainage systeme 2.15 Street signs are to be in place, water system shall be approved and activated, pressurized irrigation system approved and activated, drainage lot constructed, and road base approved by the Ada County Highway District prior to any building permits being issued. Landscaping shall be installed prior to obtaining certificates of occupancy. FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL, OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - MAWS ADDITION NO.3 - 5 2.16 The stamp, signature, and date, of the land surveyor is required on the preliminary plat map per the requirements of Idaho Code 54-1215-3. 2.17 Provide lot closure information to verify minimum lot square footages of 6,500 square feet. Although the plat indicates lot sizes are 6,500 square feet, the lot dimensions do not indicate minimum lot size is being met. 2.18 Revise Note 3 to indicate Lot 34 is a drainage lot, not Lot 36. 2.19 Revise Note 4 to indicate minimum house size is 1,301 square feet, exclusive of garage. 2.20 Application indicates pressurized irrigation is not proposed for this subdivision. In order to accept such a proposal, the City Council will have to review and rule on a variance request to the requirement to provide pressurized irrigation. Applicant shall investigate feasibility of hooldng up to Danbury Fair system. Meridian Fire Department's Recommendations as follows: 2.21 Applicant will need to meet all fire codes. 2.22 Common areas will need to be kept clean of trash and weeds. Ada County Highway District's Recommendations as follows: 2.23 The following existing street names shall appear on the plat: "East Pine Avenue", "North Adldns Lane", "N. Ralstin Place", E. Buchman Court", ((North Locust Grove Road". Adopt the Central District Health Department's Recommendations as follows: 2.24 The Applicant obtain written approval for the central sewage and central water prior to the approval of the Conditional Use Permit. 2.25 The Applicant's central sewage and central 'water plans must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Health & FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - MAWS ADDITION NO.3 - 6 Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality. 2.26 Run-off is not to create a mosquito breeding problem. 2.27 Stonnwater shall be pretreated through a grassy swale prior to discharge to the subsurface to prevent impact to groundwater and surface water quality. ---r; By action of the City Council at its regular meeting held on the day of <l1l~ 7 1999. c.*, J- o~< ROBERT D. CORRIE Mayor, City of Meridian Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public Wor~lD artment. \\\\\\\I!H/(II[I"I "- - A~~ \\\\ of rf,E:~-' Ili/hl/ L aa By: ~~ . ~,""~~0~t.ed;:~!t. ~)~~-;- ;;;J --/ 7 -----""'-C.t Cl 1 ~ () /" ....(\rr~' Ci?...1 ~ .,\, V ~. 1 Y erl<' ~ ~v- "<~ " ~ - ~~ ~ ~ - - - ~ SEAL ~ -::. ~ r,:::: ~ ~ >$;0.1 0 g ~.,o 08r 151 · .5.;.f "/ 1" ~, "- /,., "'4 a ~\ ,.....' .1,1//.. 01" &'."~'l " \.", 1,)// ........, t; \\\\ {1;llIn~ ntH"\ FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT - MAWS ADDITION NO" 3 - 7 APPROVAL OF THE FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT The Meridian City Council adopts and approves the Findings and Order of Conditional Approval of Preliminary Plat. ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED MAYOR CORRIE (TIE B~~) VOTED U MOTION: APPROVED:~ISAPPROVED: Z:\Govenunental M unicipal\ W ork\M\Meridian 15360 M\,MawsPre PIa tCC. FCS RECEIVED JAN - 5 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS AND ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT.. MAWS ADDITION NO.3 - 8 JUSTIN P. AYLSWORTH JULIE KLEIN FISCHER WM. F. GIORAY, III D. SAMUEL JOHNSON WILLIAM A. MORROW CHRISTOPHER S. NYE PHILIP A. PETERSON STEPHEN L. PRuss ERIC S. ROSSMAN TODD A. ROSSMAN R. STEPHEN RUTHERFORD TERRENCE R. WHITE WHITE, PETERSON, PRUSS, MORROW & GIGRAY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 200 EAST CARLTON AVENUE, SUITE 31 POST OFFICE BOX 1150 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83680..1150 TEL (208) 288..2499 FAX (208) 288..2501 NAMPA OFFICE 104 NINTH AVENUE SOUTH POST OFFICE BOX 247 NAMPA, IDAHO 83653#0247 TEL (208) 466#9272 FAX (208) 466#4405 PLEASE REPLY TO MERIDIAN OFFICE January 25, 1999 RECE~D FEB - 1 1999 CITY OF MERIDIAN William G. Berg, Jr. Meridian City Clerk 33 East Idaho Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 RE: MALLARD LANDING, LLC / LANDING SUBDIVISION NO. 11 (FP) Dear Will: Pursuant to City Council action of January 5, 1999, I have prepared the ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT in the application of Mallard Landing, LLC, regarding the Landing Subdivision No. 11. The Order is now ready for the Mayor's signature and after the Mayor's signature has been secured, and the City Clerk's signature secured, the original should be retained by the City Clerk. Copies of the Order of Conditional Approval of Final Plat should be served upon the Applicant, the PlalU1ing and Zoning Department and the Public Works Department, as designated by the City Clerk's signature. If you need further assistance by this office, please advise. Very truly ~. F. Gigray, III WFG/msg Enclosure BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE ) APPLICATION OF MALLARD ) LANDING, LLC, APPLICATION ) FOR FINAL PLAT FOR THE ) LANDING SUBDIVISION NO. II, ) MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) ) ORDER OF CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT This matter coming before the City Council for Final Plat approval pursuant to ~ 11-9-604 H Municipal Code of the City of Meridian this 5th day of January, I 999 and the Coul1cil finding that the Administrative Review is now completed as requested by the City Council as this matter was continued by the City Council on December 15th, 1998, for further clarification and to allow time for response of staff to the responding comments filed by Collins Engineering Co., Inc. dated December 15, 1998, and it being announced by staff that all items are agreed and that the Applicant has complied with staff concerns by the filing of the revised plat as evidenced in "The Landing Subdivision No. II", an Interwest Development Inc. Subdivision Collins Engineering Co. Inc. 1999 consisting of 2 sheets with the exception of need to provide a 25' setbacl, minimum 4' berm without 1 % slope and landscape along tl1e southern boundary of the plat together with a minimum 4' fence at the apex of the berm to be owned and maintained by the homeowners' association, and the other conditions and COlnments as set forth in the memorandum to the Mayor and City Council from Bruce Frecldeton, Assistant to City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, P&Z ORDER OF CONDITIONAL AFPROV AL OF FINAL PLAT FOR LANDING SUBDIVISION NO.l1 - I Administrator, consisting of seven general comments and 21 site specific comments which are herein found fair a11d reasonable, and the Council having considered the requirements of the preliminary plat the Council talces the following action: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: I. The Final Plat of THE LANDING SUBDIVISION NO. II as evidenced in Plat bearing the job reference is Conditionally Approved subject to: A. Those conditions of Staff comments as set forth in the Memorandum to the Mayor and City Council from BRUCE FRECICLETON and SHARI STILES, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto marlced Exhibit "A" and by this reference incorporated herein; and B. That applicant is to provide in the final plat for a 25' setbaclc minimum with a 41 berm without I % slope and landscape along the southern boundary of the plat, together with a minimum 41 fence at the apex of the berm to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association; and C. That the Plat provide for a 25' landscape setback beyond the State of Idaho Department of Transportation's right-of-way (for Interstate 1- 84) which shall be developed with landscaping, and no other structures, and that a note on the final plat set forth that the homeowners association is responsible for the maintenance of the landscaping; that immediate and adjacent and to the north of the ORDER OF CONDITIONAL AFPROV AL OF FINAL PLAT FOR LANDING SUBDIVISION NO.II - 2 (-- landscape setbaclc shall be a fence which shall not encroach upon the landscape setback, and which shall also be maintained by the homeowners association; and that the Planning and Zoning Administrator shall review the recorded license agreement with the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. 2. The final plat upon which there is contained the Certification and signature of the City ClerIc and the City Engineer verifying that the plat meets the City's requirements shall be signed only at such time as: a. The Plat dimensions are approved by the City Engineer; and b. The City Engineer has verified that all off-site improvements are completed and/or the appropriate performance bond has been issued guaranteeing the completion of off-site improvements. By action of the City Council at its regular meeti11g held on the 5th day of January, 1999. By: ,~ ~ BERT D. CORRIE Mayor, City of Meridian ated: ! lv1ayor ROBERT D. CORRIE HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTi\lENT (208) 88.+-.+26.+ Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD 33 EAST IDAHO J\'IERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 PUBLIC \VORKS BUILDING DEPARTivlENT (208) 8X7-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTivlENT t20Sl88.+-553) MEMORANDUM: November 25, 1998 To: Mayor and City Council Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to Ci~n)Lineer~ Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator ~ RECEIVED NO\I 2 5 1998 From: C it\" 0 f 2\'1 e rid i an City Clerk Office Re: Final Plat of the Landing Subdivision No. 11 (42 Lots on 10.88 Acres) by Mallard Landing L.L.C. We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the final plat. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council: GENERAL COiv11vIENTS 1. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. 2. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems within this project will have to be removed from their domestic service per City Ordinance Section 5-7-517. Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigation. 3. Detennine the normal groundwater elevation, and submit a profile of the subsurface soil conditions, as prepared by a soils scientist, with street development plans. 4. Indicate on the [mal plat map any FEMA floodplains affecting the area being platted, and detail plans for reducing or eliminating the boundary. 5. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian Public Works Department. 6. Make any corrections necessary to conform with the Ada County Street Name Committee's [mal approval letter for the subdivision name, street names, and lot and block numbering. Landingll.FP ( Mayor, Council and P&Z November 25, 1998 Page 2 7. Please address, in written form., all items contained in this memorandum and submit to the City Clerk's office by 5 :00 p.m. of the Monday prior to the scheduled meeting of the City Council. Prior to development plan approval, three copies of the revised plat must be reviewed by the Public Works Department for compliance with all conditions of plat approval. SITE SPECIFIC COM1v1ENTS 1. This [mal plat generally conforms to the approved preliminary plat. 2. Six-foot-high, permanent perimeter fencing is required to be in place prior to obtaining building permits unless specifically waived in writing by the City P&Z Administrator. Temporary construction fencing is required along all other boundaries of the subdivision to contain construction debris. A letter of credit or cash will be required for this fence prior to signature on the final plat. 3. This subdivision shall be required to have a minimum 25-foot-wide, four-foot-high berm as shown on the approved preliminary plat, with permanent fencing to be located on the building lot line. This buffer area shall be platted as a common lot to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. The necessity for having this lot be a common lot is to avoid problems experienced in the past with homeowners objecting to paying taxes on property which they cannot use. Also, as this is an entrance corridor to Meridian, continuity of landscaping and attention to aesthetics is vital. A detailed landscape plan, including berming details, shall be submitted for review and approval prior to development plan approval. Bonding for the improvements will be required prior to signature on the [mal plat, and no certificates of occupancy shall be issued until these improvements are complete. HUD/FHA standards require that, to be eligible for funding, the average day/night noise level is to be under 65 decibels and that there be a solid barrier to the line of sight. With the above standard applied, this would preclude most two-story homes. 4. The Idaho Transportation Department, in a letter regarding a development across the interstate, commented that structures should not be any closer than 150 feet to the state right-of-way in areas with full control of access, and a separation of 100 feet in all other areas.. 5. Documentation requested regarding minimum house sizes for previous phases of this development has not been provided. Previous legal counsel indicated that, as the property was zoned under a previous version of the ordinance, those ordinance provisions should prevail. Minimum house sizes for even the old version of the ordinance are not being met with this plat. The history and transfer of ownership of this project is extensive. It is staffs 0 inion that the current ordinance should prevail and that R-4 re . orce ore etaI re arc of the approval ot this subdivision needs to be completed to ensure that previous commitments/representations have been met. Landing! I.FP Mayor, Coun~il and P&Z November 25, 1998 Page 3 6. Minimum lot size, even under the old ordinance, is 8000 square feet. Provide lot closures for all lots to provide documentation of minimum lot sizes. 7. Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606.B. 8. Sanitary sewer and water service to this project will be via extensions of the existing mains that traverse through earlier phases. Applicant is responsible for construction of the sewer and water 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 centerline, and the water mains on the north and east. 9. All street signs, road base, streetlights, pressurized irrigation system, domestic water system (activated fire hydrants), and fencing are to be installed prior to obtaining building permits. 10. Applicant has indicated that the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to be a continuation of the existing system owned and maintained by the homeowners association. Plans and specifications for the pressurized irrigation system shall be reviewed by the Public Works Department as part of the development plan review process. A substantially complete copy of the O&M manual shall be required prior to development plan approval, and the final complete copy, including as-built drawmgs for the previous phase, shall be required prior to the City's final subdivision approval. 11. The date in the plat title will more than likely need to be changed to "1999." 12. Submit three copies of the second page of the plat for review. These copies were either not submitted originally, or not transmitted to the Public Works Department as part of the plat review packets. 13. Add "UNPLATTED" notations adjacent to the east and west subdivision boundaries. 14. Remove the streetlight from the plat legend, and replace with the notation for minimum house size excluding garage area. 15. Submit a building envelope plan showing how a 1,200-square-foot house + garage area would fit onto Lot 7, Block 18. 16. Lot 3, Block 19, doesn't meet the minimum 40-foot street frontage requirement. Make necessary adjustments to conform. 17. Please add 50' right-of-way dimensions to each roadway, as well as the ~ right-of-way dimensions along the subdivision boundary. 18. Add missing lot dimensions to Lots 21-23, Block 15 (along Verbena and sub. boundary). Landingll.FP ( Mayor, Council and P&Z November 25, 1998 Page 4 19. Show the centerline of the Kennedy Lateral adjacent to the west subdivision boundary, and the 35 foot easement line into Block 19. Previous phases along the Kennedy Lateral have been granted an encroachment of 12 feet into the easement by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. If the encroachment is allowed for this phase, create a conunon area lot over the non-encroachable balance of the easement. If the encroachment is not allowed, the conunon area lot line shall be set at the 35-foot easement line. Provide documentation supporting any encroachment prior to signature on the [mal plat map. 20. Add the yz" pin symbol to the angle point in the north boundary of Lot 1 0, Block 18. 21. Please add or revise the following plat notes: · Building setbacks and dimensional standards in this subdivision shall be in compliance with the applicable zoning regulations of the City of Meridian, and the Restrictive Covenants as filed in the office of the Ada County Recorder. · ...easement contiguous to the ffeHtpublic right-ai-way and rear lot lines... · .. . single-family dwellings only. See each lot for minimum house size requirements. Minimum house size is exclusive of garage area. · The bottom elevation of house footings shall be set a minimum of 12 inches above the highest established normal ground water elevation. · This plat is subJ.ect to the Kennedy Lateral Easement, Instrument No. 797771, records of Ada County. The Easement is 20 feet left and 35 feet right of the Kennedy Lateral centerline. This easement is in favor of the Nampa & lvferidian Irrigation District. · For description of retained irrigation and maintenance rights to the Kennedy Lateral by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, see License Agreement Instrument No. , records of Ada County. · Lots and , Block 19 are common area lots that are owned and maintained by the Landing Subdivision Homeowners Association. · The construction of fences within the Kennedy Lateral Easement will be allowed by License Agreement Instrument No. , and any subsequent addendums, record of Ada County. Landing I t .FP ** TX STATUS REPORT ** AS OF NOU 25 '98 14:56 PAGE.01 PUBLIC WORKS DATE TIME TO/FROM 09 11/25 14:53 2083850556 MODE MIN/ScC PGS CMD~ STATUS EC--S 02'06" 005 041 OK --------------------~--~-~------------------------------------~----------------------~~---~- 33 E. Idaho w.eridian. 10. 83642 Ph01e: 888-4433 Fax 887-4813 Fax To: (..oll/ns En~. From.: Shari Stiles .DCZVld COltl n.s FalC 3'12 -IS36 Date: /!-Z5-9i' Phone: 3t/L/ - '-/tf 5 J Pag~: 1- Re: cc: o Urgent o For Review o Please Comment 0 Please Reply o Please Recycle -Comments: ADA COUNTY EVALUATION SHEET Proposed Development Name STETSON EST. (Christen Acres) File No 98-035 Date Reviewed 11/05/98 Preliminary Stage XXX Final Engineer/Developer Pinnacle Enqr. / Buckner The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Ada County Street Name Ordinance. "S. WALKING FARMS LANE" is approved as the name of your private lane for this development. If a private lane is not wanted the name would be liS. WALKING FARMS PLACE." "RUSTLERII is approved for use in this development. Accordinq to our 11-5-98 a.m. telephone conversation (Bob Unqer and I) there is to be a plat revision with a second private lane. There was no revised plat to review. The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMI DESIGNEES Fi ra District Marid ia n Representative Date Ada County Engineer John Priester \ Ada Planning Association Ann Hurley Date City of (impt Mrd) Representative NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the t i m e 0 f s i 9 n i n 9 the ufi n a I p I a fl, 0 the rw i set h e p I at will not b e s i 9 n e d !!!! Sub Index Street Index 3N 1W 26 Section ADA COUNTY EVALUATION SHEET Proposed Development Name STETSON EST. (Christen Acres) File No 98-035 Date Reviewed 11/05/98 Preliminary Stage XXX Fi nal Engineer/Developer Pinnacle EnOL / Buckner The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Ada County Street Name Ordinance. liS. WALKING FARMS LANE" is approved as the name of your private lane for this development. If a private lane is not wanted the name would be liS. WALKING FARMS PLACE./I The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be offjcially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE, AGENCY REPRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES Ada County Engineer John Priester Date Ada Planning Association Ann Hurley 0k~~'""{\ \-\\..J-J~~ Date \ \ - ~-92 City of (impt Mrd) Representative Date Fire District Meridian Representative Date NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the t i mea f s i g n j n 9 the -fi n a I p I at N lot h e rw is e the p I at will not b e s i 9 n e d !!! I Sub Index Street Index 3N 1 W 26 Section ADA COUNTY EVALUATION SHEET Proposed Development Name STETSON EST. (Christen Acres) File No 98-035 Date Reviewed 11 112/98 Preliminary Stage XXX Fi nal Engineer/Developer Pinnacle Enor. I Buckner The Street name comments listed below are made by the members of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE (under direction of the Ada County Engineer) regarding this development in accordance with the Ada County Street Name Ordinance. "W. BANDIT COURT" is approved and shall appear on the plat. The above street name comments have been read and approved by the following agency representatives of the ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE. ALL of the signatures must be secured by the representative or his designee in order for the street names to be officially approved. ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE, AGENCY REPRESENTATIVES OR DESIGNEES Ada County Engineer John Priester Date Ada Planning Association ~ Ann Hurley Date \ \ - , C 5) ~ //-1 ;7- t' cT' Date //- / ft;-9? City of (impt Mrd) Representative Fire District Meridian Representative NOTE: A copy of this evaluation sheet must be presented to the Ada County Engineer at the time of signing the -final platll, otherwise the plat will not be signed!!!! Sub Index Street Index 3N 1W 26 Section NUMBERING OF LOTS AND BLOCKS TR\5UBs\CQUNTY.FRM MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, JANUARY 5,1999-7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL: X RON ANDERSON X CHARLIE ROUNTREE X GLENN BENTLEY X KEITH BIRD X MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE CONSENT AGENDA A. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 15, 1998: (APPROVE) B. ORDINANCE #808 - PRIVATE SECURITY SERVICES: (APPROVE) C. APPROVE BILLS: (APPROVE) REGULAR AGENDA 1. RECOGNITION OF RETIRING VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS: (PRESENTATION) 2. TABLED DECEMBER 15, 1998: BID RESULTS FOR GOVERNMENT UTILITIES BILLINGS SYSTEM: (APPROVE/AWARD BID TO CASELLE, INC FOR $43,100.00) 3. TABLED DECEMBER 15,1998: FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC - SW % SECTION 13 T. 3N., R. 1 W: (APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS) 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY - EAST OF 603 PINE: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION) 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 2.84 ACRES FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY - EAST OF 603 PINE: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION) 6. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: (ACCEPT AS TO FORM & DRAFT BE SUBMITTED TO APPLICANT) 7. ORDINANCE #809 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: (CONTINUE ACTION TO 1-19-99 C/C MEETING, 1ST READING) 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 5.4 ACRES FOR PROPOSED MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION BY HUBBLE ENGINEERING - NW OF EAGLE ROAD / 1-84 INTERCHANGE AND WEST OF EXISTING TEXACO: (RE-OPEN PUBLIC HEARING/RE- NOTICE FOR 2/2/99) 9. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: (TABLE UNTIL 2/2/99) 10. ORDINANCE #810 - ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: (TABLE UNTIL 2/2/99) 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.2 ACRES BY ROBERT F. BEEDE- 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: (APPROVE) 12. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: (DELETE) 13. ORDINANCE #811-ANNEXATION AND ZONING 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: (CONTINUE ACTION TO 1/19/99, 1ST R"EADING) 14. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.30 ACRES BY QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. - ~ MILE WEST OF OVERLAND FROM MERIDIAN-KUNA ROAD SOUTH SIDE BORDERING WEST SIDE OF RO-HO ENT.: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 15. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .96 ACRES (OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK) BY RAY ROBNETT - 3036 LANARK STREET: (APPROVE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 16. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: (DELETE) 17. ORDINANCE #812 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: (CONTINUE TO 1/19/99 & 2/2/99, 1ST READING) I { 18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GENERAL AUTO REPAIR & SERVICE BY JOHN BISS - WEST OF MERIDIAN ROAD: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 19. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.84 ACRES BY PAUL A. HOFFMAN (MERIDIAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH) - SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND USTICK: (CANCEL PUBLIC HEARING/REMAND APPLICATION TO P & Z COMMISSION) 20. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 4.296 ACRES FOR PROPOSED SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC - SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 21. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC - SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: (APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS) 22. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3 BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - NORTH OF PINE & WEST OF LOCUST GROVE: (APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS) 23. REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY TODD MASON D/B/A MOXIE JAVA - 106 E. WILLIAMS: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS & ORDER) 24. WATER I SEWER / TRASH DELINQUENCIES: (APPROVE) 25. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. KENNY BOWERS: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION FOR ARCHITECT SELECTION FOR NEW FIRE STATION: (APPROVE 2GA) Z&A B. GARY SMITH: 1. DIGESTER FACILITIES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT TO EXISTING KELLER ASSOCIATES DESIGN CONTRACT: (APPROVE) 2. CONTRACT DRILLING OF EXPLORATORY WATER TEST- WELL AT CITY WELL NO.8 (STEVENS & SONS WELL DRILLING, INC.): (APPROVE) 3. CONTRACT FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MONITORING OF PUMP AND PUMPHOUSE FOR CITY WELL NO. 18 IN SUMMERFIELD SUBDIVISION (CIVIL SURVEY CONSULTANTS, INC.): (APPROVE) 4. BID RESULTS FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES: (APPROVE CUSTOM CLEANING SERVICES) C. BILL GIGRA Y: 1. APPROVAL OF RESPONSE LETTER TO THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: (APPROVE WITH COMMENTS) D. WILL BERG: 1. REQUEST BY D'ARLENE STUZMAN REGARDING VACATION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY: (DENY) E. MAYOR CORRIE: 1. RESOLUTION #209: (APPROVE) 2. AMEND RESOLUTION #172: (NOT DISCUSSED) MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 5, 1999 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. on January 5, 1999 by Mayor Corrie. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree. OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Bill Gigray, Bill Gordon, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Kenny Bowers, John Shawcroft, Mayor Bob Corrie. Corrie: Council you have the consent agenda in front of you. Are there any verifications on the consent agenda? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move we pull item B and hold it for discussion after item number one on the regular agenda. Rountree: I'll second. Corrie: Motion is made and second that we pull Ordinance No. 808 and put it as item number two. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for consent agenda with Ordinance 808 removed. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion we approve the consent agenda items. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Bird that we approve the consent agenda items without Ordinance 808. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 1. RECOGNITION OF RETIRING VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS: Bowers: Mayor and City Council we have retired some of our firefighters. They have moved out of the district or have other projects going and have not been able to make our Tuesday night meetings, so we have come up with a different kind of a program now for certain years. Certain years we give plaques, certain years we give lanterns, other years we give axes, so this year is the first we're going to do this and we would like for you guys to help us out on this. Would Bob Corrie come forward here. Would Dave Atkinson come forward please. Three years of service. Brian Delange, he's not here. He's got three years of service. Kevin Newberry, would you come forward. Kevin has four years of service. Tony Ewing. Tony has four years of service. Tommy Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 2 lebolt five years of service and Tom Vincent come forward please. We hope Tom has got a big wall to put this on. Twenty years of service plus for Tom Vincent. This kind of . got started this year with Rod Shaul coming and wanting to do a little different for the retired people. Johnny Geisler got together and got the awards in and they didn't make it for our Christmas party so that's why we would like them to come tonight and present to them in front of the Council and the people. As you know every Tuesday night from 7:00 until 10:00 they're over there putting in a lot of hours, and I know a plaque isn't a lot of stuff but it is a little appreciation for us. Thank you guys for them come in tonight. Corrie: Thank you Kenny. I just want to say congratulations to the people that got their awards and also the other firemen here tonight. We really appreciate what you're doing and thank you very, very much. Anyone else from the Council would like to - Anderson: Mr. Mayor I would just like to echo some of those sentiments. As you were reading off the years of service, I was totally some of that up and I come up with just 39 or 40 years worth of service to the community here. I know a lot of these fellows. I've worked closely with them and I know the dedication it takes to do this for that many years and the amount of time and on behalf of myself and the rest of the Council I'd say we deeply appreciate you guys and wish you good luck in whatever it is that you're going to pursue now, and thank you for your time and efforts. Corrie: Okay the Ordinance #808 the private security services from the consent agenda has been pulled and will be open at this time. Council comments, questions? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I had not seen or heard of this ordinance and speaking with the Chief he had not seen it either before today and I'd just like to know how it came about and who was the author of it and get some background on it. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, this particular ordinance exists in your books today. It's not a new ordinance. This is an amendment of the existing section of the municipal code of the city. The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to bring the amount of liability insurance coverage which is required in conformance with state law as it exists in terms of city's liability and this issue came about by reason of the fact that there were some applications made to the clerk's office for these types of security service license applications and they didn't have a form to process the applications but we had a city ordinance that governed it and I believe you have attached to your packet here a copy of the proposed application form to be used. That's not part of the ordinance. I just noticed that the existing ordinance was the old 300,000 provision that was the old tort claim liability which has been changed to single limit 500,000, so I thought we should bring it current. So you are just to help familiarize you, when you see an ordinance that's proposing an amendment to existing code you will see at the heading that's it's an amendment of the existing chapter. You will also see the strike throughs and additions so those items which are stricken through means that that Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 3 portion of the ordinance would be deleted by this amendment and those items which are underlined will be that portion that will be placed in its stead. Corrie: Any other questions of Council? Bentley: Mr. Mayor I just have a question for the Chief. On the application form that's been attached I trust this was drafter by you Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Yeah, in working with the Clerk's office. Bentley: Is everything on there that you feel needs to be on there? Gordon: I've got enough information there to do a background investigation Councilman. Bentley: Thank you. I have nothing further. Gigray: I would just further add with your permission Mr. Mayor that we tried to make the application follow the existing ordinance. We didn't really try to change the rest of the ordinance and certainly would accept any comment the police department or anyone else might have to revise this whole section. We're not attempting to do that. We're just trying to bring that insurance coverage current. Corrie: Will, what's the ordinance number would this be? 808, any further discussion? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay hearing none I will entertain a motion for approval of Ordinance 808 Private Security Services. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the amendment to Ordinance 808 section 8-2208(b) of the Private Security Services Ordinance. Bird: Do you waive the three public readings? Rountree: Don't need it on a - Bird: It's an ordinance. Rountree: With suspension of rules. Bird: I'll second that. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 4 Corrie: Motion been made to accept Ordinance #808 item number b with suspension of rules. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of - ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson, yea. Bentley, yea. Rountree, yea. Bird, yea. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bird: Mr. Mayor, Counsel says we have to vote on the ordinance now that we have amended it. Gigray: Now that you've just waived the reading. Bird: Now we have to vote on it. We have waived the three readings of it. Now we have to vote on the Ordinance 808. Rountree: Motion was to approve the amendment with suspension of rules. Gigray: Okay just so the record reflects, you've taken both those actions. Corrie: Yeah, both actions under one vote. 2. TABLED DECEMBER 15, 1998: BID RESULTS FOR GOVERNMENT UTILITIES BILLINGS SYSTEM: Corrie: I believe this is your John. John if you would like to give us some information on this. Shawcroft: I think there were some questions you gentlemen had last time that we're going to try and answer for you. I apologize that I wasn't here to do that for you. Gary Smith tried to answer to questions, but he was not involved actively with this particular bid. Basically the bids came in from Cassell Springbrook and Census. They are a window based billing system. There was some concerns that we had with making sure that we compared the products on an even basis. So what we did is actually make sure that all the training was included that all the data conversion was there so that we give you gentlemen something that you could confidently vote on. Corrie: John, I had a question and I think Council did too. One is on this training of eight people. There was training fees and then travel, lodging and meals and transportation. How many days of training is that? Shawcroft: That's five days. Basically Springbrook and Cassell did not include the training in their bid. Census did because it was on-site. Springbrook and Cassell will Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 5 tell you that that bid of $7,000 and $10,000 respectively is at their site and they did not include any travel for our people to go down and do that. Corrie: Now if they came out here for five days, they charged $5,000; is that correct? Shawcroft: That's correct, sir. Corrie: Plus the travel. How many people does that include? Shawcroft: For the trainer, that's one if he comes on site. Corrie: So we figure that it's $5,000 and then his travel to and from. Shawcroft: Correct. Whereas if we send them off site, we're probably three to five people sharing motel rooms and it comes out fairly close. Corrie: Council any further questions? Anderson: Our question last time John was is there a possibility that we could bring their trainers out here and find a computer lab or something and rent it here and how would it affect our operation ,if we send all eight people at one time to go take this training. Is that feasible or is it going to be broke up over a couple of different time periods and is it going to affect our day to day operation of the billing department? Shawcroft: They will if we want them to both Springbrook and Cassell will come on site and do the training here if we so desire. From what we saw with the accounting system when it came on line, there was a great deal of trouble with that training with interruptions. Those people have important jobs, and it just seemed to be that they were interrupted a lot. If we sent people down we did consider sending people after a billing cycle so that we can send maybe five people, leave a skeleton crew and just get by until they got back. Anderson: So we could send them like in two different groups too maybe to get - we want to train 8 eight people; is that right? Shawcroft: I think that's the number that we were using, but I think not necessarily so. Anderson: We have less than that? Shawcroft: Yeah, we could actually get by with less because some of the people that go down there are supervisors and they can come back and train the people who work for them. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 6 Anderson: So we could send them all in one group and not interrupt our service? Shawcroft: Right. We were just using 8 because that's what Census used was 8 people for training you know training 8 people and so we wanted to make sure that dollar figure actually represented what we're getting, so that we weren't favoring one . vendor over another. Anderson: So the money that's in their bid for travel, lodging, meals, transportation, that's for their people. Shawcroft: If it is for Census, it's for their people. And I think it depends on how you look at it. If we send our people remotely to the remote location, then the city will pay that out of pocket and the vendor won't receive anything. But if they come on site, then they will have their fee plus their travel expenses. Corrie: In my mind if we send out our people, we've got a $13,000 bill to send our people roughly. I mean it doesn't come out that high, but- Shawcroft: No. I think you know you actually can put two people in a motel room. Meals are not that expensive and flights from here to Salt Lake aren't that bad, so I think it would be considerably less. Corrie: Any other questions on the item number two? Rountree: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Entertain a motion on the results of the government utilities billing system. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the bid for the government utilities billing system in the amount of $43,100 with Cassell, Inc. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to accept the price of $43,100 of Cassell, Inc. for the training. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 3. TABLED DECEMBER 15,1998: FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC - SW ~ SECTION 13 T. 3N., R. 1 W: / \ \ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 7 Corrie: Staff comments first. Shari? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council we received the revised plat you just had placed before you tonight. I have had discussion with the developer and we worked out some of the issues. On the revised plat there is still a discrepancy in the ordinance it needs to be changed. It's minor and I think it can be completed. I would like on the record there to be some additional conditions on this plat that some of the issues may have to be worked out during the development plan review process as far as the landscape setback. Review that application I would want - I do want it on record that I am requesting and recommending that the 25 foot landscape setback beyond the right-of- way of the totally landscaped setback and that the fence be beyond that and that that is subject to design review approval by the Planning and Zoning Department. I would also like a note put on the plat that the homeowners association is responsible for maintenance of this landscape easement and that no fencing is to encroach the easement and that before recording of the final plat - before signature on the final plat that we review the recorded license agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and make sure appropriate notes are put on the plat about encroachment of that easement of fencing or any other structures. What you don't have in your packets is an additional page from the developer that has changed some of the square footages on Landing No.1 0, which has already been approved. However we did not get the square footages of the housing resolved upon approval of that. It hasn't been signed yet. So they have submitted revised minimum square footages of the housing for Landing No. 10 and Landing No. 11 with this submittal that we are requesting to meet the ordinance requirements from 1991. Corrie: Any further comments from staff? Rountree: Are you going to repeat your statement or do you want me to read it again? Bentley: Shari, on this plat map we have here, I have a question on it. The title on it is Landing No. 11 and down in the bottom of it, it shows Landing No. 1 0, Landing NO.9. Where is Landing No. 11? Stiles: The lots that are shown are Landing No. 11. That is what the plat is of. A requirement of state code is that they list the adjacent whether it's platted or unplatted or what those subdivision names are. Bentley: Okay that clarifies that and then a follow up at my request the previous meeting they were suppose to get with you and get all the problems straightened out. You're saying that hasn't been done? Meridian City Council January 51 1999 Page 8 Stiles: We haven't had a meeting in person. We discussed over the phone and discussed a lot of these issues. One of my - do you have my list of comments? Just to clarify where the questions were on the comments, on site specific number two, we had requested a six foot high permanent perimeter fence be required. And they have asked that phases ten and eleven be combined if they are going to develop those at the same time. Staff has no problem with them constructing the perimeter fence around the entire without requiring the temporary fencing. Number three, we had asked that the buffer area be platted as a common lot, however they would be below the minimum required square footages for the lots so we didn't request that, but we do request that the 25 foot landscape berm be provided and the fence be at that landscape setback. Site specific comment number four was in reference to the Idaho Transportation Department and what they had quoted about another project. We had not had a response from them on this project, but seeing as the approval was so long ago, I don't know how we could impose that requirement. I am very concerned about the buffering for this project. Everyone knows there is going to be another lane constructed westbound to Nampa, and I just don't want to see tax dollars spent on an 8 foot high concrete wall at that time when everyone knew full well when the development went in that that would be a requirement and that that would happen and that it would impact this development and that is why I'm so concerned about the buffer. The documentation, they have revised their house sizes as I said for Landing No. 10 and Landing No. 11 to meet the ordinance of 1991. It appears that all of the lots sizes now meet the minimum requirement. And I ask that all other comments stated here tonight and in our written comments would be incorporated into the approval. Rountree: Shari you had some comments previously and I'm not sure if it was on this one or one of the adjoining ones about the number of lots and sizes of houses on the particular lots as indicated on this plat. They have the house size shown, but minimum house size that would be shown allowed on the lots. You obviously haven't had this long enough to compute if that is consistent with our ordinance. Stiles: Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council, I did receive a revised square footages for Landing No. 10 that I did not have in your packets and they have - I have computed the percentages and they do meet the requirements of the 1991 ordinance. Rountree: Okay. Corrie: Any other comments from Council? Questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: I would have a question of the developer or his engineer. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 9 B. Blazer: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, Bruce Blazer represent Mallard Landing LLC. Rountree: My question centers around the specifics of the barrier on the southern side of the proposed subdivision adjacent to 1-84 and there's been some confusion about what's going to be there and what it is we want and I know you had some comments at the last meeting that we had only wanted a certain height barrier and you were proposing something more significant than that, and I would just like to know specifically what is being proposed there in terms of height of berm, fencing, and landscaping. B. Blazer: Well the plat requirement shows a 4 foot berm and 25 foot easement and in the letter that I gave you last time I indicated that we would like a much higher berm than that. I think currently we have a berm that's between six and eight feet tall. We have additional dirt that we were going to take out of the roads of phase 11 and place on that berm. To make it even taller, because we recognize that we need a barrier there to help take the noise away from the houses. The problem arises I think between our concept and staff in that staff wants us to place the fence on the 25 foot line and landscape the full 25 feet to the southern boundary to the property. We are proposing putting the fence on top of the berm and landscaping from the fence to the southern edge of the property. In discussing this with staff, we came to the conclusions we could move the berm to the north. It would encroach into the backyards of the homes that are there. To do that we wouldn't place as high a berm as we would if we could use the full 25 foot easement for the berm so there's sort of a trade off there. I think in design we're open to just about anything. We have to protect a little bit the backyards of the homes that will be built there, so we aren't in opposition to any advice that the Council wants to give to us and any direction that you want to place on us. Rountree: I personally would like to see that berm as high as you can get it and if you place the fence on top of the berm and landscape from the fence to the roadway right- of-way, that's consistent with some of the treatments that are further east along the interstate. My concern with that would be how would the homeowners or the homeowners association maintain that area. B. Blazer: The area within the 25 foot easement would be maintained by the homeowners association. Shari wants it placed on the face of the plat. We're also putting it in the covenants of the plat. So it would be maintained by the homeowners association. Rountree: And you indicated that the berm height at this point is approximating eight feet and going to be higher depending on how much more material you have to waste. B. Blazer: That's what we were planning on doing, yeah. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 10 Rountree: Approximate ten feet? B. Blazer: Very easily could. If we take the slopes one to one, we could get a ten foot berm there. Rountree: That's a pretty steep slope to try to maintain something on. B. Blazer: It is on the freeway side you could landscape it to where your upkeep would be minimal. On the homeowners' side yes it would create a greater burden on the homeowners. Rountree: Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Bentley: None. Corrie: Thank you Mr. Blazer. Shari do you have any further comments in this from what you've heard? Stiles: I would just like to reiterate I would like the fence at the 25 foot line at the apex of whatever berm is provided and that it not be a one to one slope which would be pretty much impossible to maintain. Corrie: Any other questions Council? Rountree: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay, I'll entertain a motion on the item number three, final plat for the Landing No. 11. Either approve the motion, deny the motion, amend the motion and have the attorney prepare the proper order on it. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the final plat for the Landing No. 11 by Mallard Landing LLC with the conditions stated forth in the previous letter from Shari Stiles, P & Z Administrator and incorporate the conditions referred to tonight and order the attorney to prepare proper order. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 11 Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to approve the Landing LLC with the amendments asked for condition of staff and that the attorney ordered to prepare the proper order. Any further discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor just a point of clarification the specifics as far as the conditions go. We talked about some modifications and different kinds of conditions particularly as it related to the berm and slopes probably for the applicant as well and staff and Mr. Gigray. Tell them what you meant Glenn. Bentley: With regards to the berm as suggested by Shari and Councilman Rountree to have the berm raised to height to what they were discussing and have the fence on the berm and at the apex of the berm and at the 25 foot property line without the one to one slope. Rountree: Thanks. Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor as outlined by Mr. Bentley's motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 4. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY - EAST OF 603 PINE: Corrie: Direct staff to the notice that we got from Mr. Gigray, City Attorney, that states that you could take up item 4 and 5, then item six of the Council should receive the same approval and approve the draft form and then request the development agreement be submitted to the applicant for approval and further action of the City Council in this matter, and then item seven (Inaudible). Staff comments first. Shari? Stiles: I'm sorry Mr. Mayor and Council, I have not reviewed the Findings the variance however they were regarding the frontage on the lots. These lots are very deep and they've asked for a variance on the frontage for that reason. They do meet the minimum lot size easily for the zone they have requested which is R-8. It's a fairly straight forward project I believe. I have not looked at the development agreement either. I don't know if I have that in my packet. Items 4, 5, and 6 and 7 I have no particular problems with. ( 1\ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 12 Corrie: Council you have the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on item 4 in front of you along with the comments of the City Attorney. Anyone need any clarifications of the City Attorney's comments? Mr. Gigray would you please help us on this? Gigray: Item number 4 is simply before you for consideration because this way the action you took at the last meeting and I was just directed to do Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in conformance with your decision to grant the variance so what we do here in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as you can see is go through the basic requirements of your ordinance of the specific facts as it relates to this particular applicant who that is where the location of the property is, where it located and then some of the specifics about the request. The existing special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that would be in finding number 12 which is a condition precedent to granting the variance as I believe the evidence presented to you before was the fact that this was an infill project and due to its size and the street frontage availability there were economic circumstances on this parcel that would if this variance would weren't granted would leave a 2.5 acre parcel not developed or annexed and that strict compliance with the ordinance would result in inhibiting the achievements and objectives of your zoning ordinance and it wouldn't be detrimental finding 14 to public welfare or injurious to other property. There wasn't any testimony or any evidence to that effect and those findings just basically are there to ensure that evidence is presented that sets a basis for granting a variance. Conclusions of law are simply recitations of the appropriate city ordinance that govern this particular variance request and the decision or order is granting to the applicant and Virginia Jenson Family Trust is the owner here. Tony Hickey is an authorized agent for that Trust granting the platting variance and because the minimum street frontage and the particular lots I proposed in this decision and order to make reference to their specific drawing because it is that drawing that was the basis of this application rather than to set specific footages to lots that are not yet part of a final plat, and so that's why you see that order drafted that way. Bird: Thank you. Corrie: Any further discussion on Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law? Rountree: I have none. Mr. Mayor I move that City Council approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision granting the variance for the OHason Park Subdivision. Anderson: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision granting the variance. ROLL CALL VOTE: Bird, yea. Anderson, yea. Rountree, yea. Bentley, yea. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 13 MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 5. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 2.84 ACRES FOR PROPOSED OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION BY TONY HICKEY - EAST OF 603 PINE: Corrie: Staff do you have any comments on this one? Gigray: Do you wish me to report on this since I drafted it Mr. Mayor? Corrie: Shari you don't have anything other than what you say? Hearing none, Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, based on the action taken by the City Council at your meeting on the 15th of December, I have prepared the proposed Findings. Because this particular matter had Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law from Planning and Zoning Commission, you will see that your adoption of those Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the specific numbers read in relation thereto are identified in Finding of Fact three and four. The first portion the first two findings have to do with the fact that notice has been done in accordance with the law for your own public hearing, and then in conclusions of law this proposes as you took action that night to adopt the Planning and Zoning Commission's conclusion of law. I've moved six to a fact because I think it's more a fact than a conclusion of law. But in any event it is the same as it was presented to you and then I have added in conclusions of law two through four. Those specific statutory provisions that relate to the City Council's authority in this matter. And then in the decision and order granting annexation and zoning application, I have set forth specific conditions therein based on the record that I understood was made on the 15th and that was that the applicant would need to prepare the legal description. We would prepare the appropriate ordinance of annexation and then that the developer enter into a development agreement that provided for specific conditions and then you will see part three thereof the litany and list of all of the conditions that would become part of the development agreement which we have drafted for your consideration which is the next item. Corrie: Further discussion? Then I will entertain a motion of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law request for annexation and zoning. Rountree: Mr. Mayor that the City Council approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting annexation and zoning application subject to the conditions as stated. Anderson: Second. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 14 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson (End of Tape) 6. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: Corrie: Mr. Gigray. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, pursuant to the action that you just took, we have prepared a proposed drafter for development agreement which you have before you. This is a standard format form which I hope will become more familiar to you that we were using on these. Based on the action that the City Council took, we have not included and eliminated the lien language that was in some of the earlier forms. That is not part of this. This particular draft provides in section 4 the particular requirements of the development agreement which are specified in your order of decision. What we would request your consideration would be the approval of this form and then your direction that it be submitted to the developer for their review and signature and sent back pending your taking action on the annexation. Because the condition of the annexation and zoning is that they enter into the development agreement. Corrie: Questions Council? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we accept the development agreement for the Oliason Park Subdivision as to form and request that the draft be submitted to the applicant for signature. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley on the development agreement. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 7. ORDINANCE #809 - ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLIASON PARK SUBDIVISION: Gigray: Mr. Mayor if you wish a little information this item. Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, because of the record of this matter and as part of your action approving the annexation and zoning and as I saw the record there is a requirement the applicant prepare the legal description for the annexation. To ensure that we have a legal description that will meet the requirements of the code and I recommend that we have those approved by our own Public Works Director, Gary Smith, to ensure that we don't get them kicked back from the State Tax Commission and that they are accurate. In I 1 Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 15 addition prior to passing this ordinance I recommend the development agreement be signed by the applicant and then back to this Council so that part is done prior to annexation, but I do believe that having the draft is important because you could sponsor this ordinance. Someone could get it on the table, do the first reading and then just put it on the table for continuance until the next meeting. The procedure I think should be followed if the development agreement isn't signed prior to the next Council meeting, then you could direct the clerk to just continue it on until that happens or you can proceed with the second reading because you could tier this out and still do it in stages, but you get it on the agenda, it stays there and it doesn't fall off. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have a question for Mr. Gigray. This particular type of ordinance only needs two readings not three? Gigray: No, all ordinances need three. I'm just saying at some particular stage of the proceedings you may determine you want to waive the remainder of the rule and proceed to passing it. Corrie: Mr. Gigray on the reading the ordinance, is it two times you read the first part and one reading is the entire ordinance or how is that done? Gigray: Usually my experience has been they just read the title that that suffices for reading the ordinance because the title of the - state statute prescribes and you'll see our titles tend to be a little bit long, but it says it should have all the essential points of the ordinance. If you have readings, you need to do that. At some point when you can waive the readings, you can just do that. Now you could elect in the future to place this on - well no, never mind, I'm thinking of something else. Bird: Mr. Mayor I have a question to ask. This ordinance is upon the developer agreeing to sign our development right? If he don't agree with that development agreement and stuff then this ordinance is null and void right? Gigray: No, what you've done is you've ordered the approval of the annexation and zoning, but the actual ordinance itself is the one that will annex the property. What you don't want to do is create an ambiguity by annexing the property and then have a developer decide they're not going to sign a development agreement and then you may be put in a position of having to go through a deannexation procedure which would be - I just don't think there's any reason why the city would want to put itself in that position. Bird: Why would we want to pass the ordinance without him signing the development agreement? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 16 Gigray: Weill would recommend that you not do that, but what you'll do by sponsoring it is you just get it on the agenda for consideration because until you waive the rule and have the third reading, it's just on the agenda for further consideration. Bird: Can tonight be considered the first reading? Gigray: If you choose to do so or you may say I'm not ready to sponsor the ordinance yet. And you move on to the next agenda item, but I was thinking this would be a way. We've already prepared this. It gets it on the agenda and then the clerk will bring it back to you at the next Council meeting. Rountree: Could we not continue action on this particular ordinance until our next regularly scheduled meeting? Gigray: You certainly could. I just think it probably ought to have some sponsor in ~" order to get it on the agenda, or I guess you could receive it from me and then you jusf put it on the - just table any further action at that point. You know it's a piece of legislation that should have a sponsor to have a place on the agenda. Rountree: I move that we continue action on Ordinance #809 until our next regularly scheduled meeting January 19th, 1999. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to continue the Ordinance #809 and I assume tonight the first reading on that one. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Mr. Clerk would you like to read the title to Ordinance #809? Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor. (ORDINANCE #809 WAS READ) 8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 5.4 ACRES FOR PROPOSED MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION BY HUBBLE ENGINEERING - NW OF EAGLE ROAD / 1-84 INTERCHANGE AND WEST OF EXISTING TEXACO: Corrie: Shari, staff report and recommendations. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council you have received a letter from the applicant's representative regarding the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. The condition ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 17 does still remain in the Findings that the conditional use permit will be required for each lot on the subdivision. The applicant's representative and I have not had time to sit down together and discuss the development agreement and we are also waiting from the applicant some covenants that can some of the conditions could be incorporated in the development agreement so I would request that you table items 8, 9 and 10 to your meeting of January 19, 1999. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move that we table items 8,9, and 10 concerning the Midvalley Business Park until January 19th, 1999. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to table items 8, 9, and 10 recommendation of staff until 1/19/99. Any further discussion? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council point of procedure. Given the comments received here it may be in the best interest of all to have the Council reopen the public hearing on this matter to receive the additional information. So that you have a record before you of that additional information so that you can make a final decision on this matter, and I believe the effected property owners would be entitled to notice of that because you cannot open a record back up once you've closed it unless you reopen it, but if you direct the City Clerk to reopen this or that you direct that this be reopened and that the Clerk give notice of continued public hearing and serve affected property owners, I believe we'd be in compliance with state law and our city ordinances to receive additional information. It's not a problem with the development agreement. It's not a problem with the preliminary plat. The issue has to do with the zoning designation and that's where we have the public hearing that first item for your consideration for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision in relation to zoning. Corrie: So we just need a public hearing on item 8 then? Gigray: Right I mean you just reopen the public hearing. You had one before and then you'll have to give the 15 day notice, which means you'll probably have to move this into February. Corrie: Do we need any motion to - well we better start all over again. Have Mr. Bentley remove his motion from the floor and then we get the second to - Bird: I remove my second. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would move that for item number 8, Midvalley Business Park Subdivision that we instruct the Clerk to reopen and post the public hearing for the ( ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 18 Findings of Facts on the annexation and zonin~, the 5.4 acres and schedule that for the first meeting in February, which is February 2n . Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to have item number 8 be reopened at the public hearing for the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law to be given. The meeting would be February the 2nd, 1999. Any further discussion? Gigray: Just a point of information Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. I think all the clerk would need to do is just send notice of continued public hearing with the same notice he provided before. In other words, the application is the same. Nothing has changed there. There's no material change, but that notice will show that you will be receiving additional testimony at that point in time. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 9. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: 10. ORDINANCE #810 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF MIDVALLEY BUSINESS PARK SUBDIVISION: Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for items 9 and 10. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move that we table items 9 and 10 concerning Midvalley Business Park development agreement and ordinance #810 until 2/2/99. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Anderson - point of order Mr. Attorney, can we go ahead and do that by putting new Findings and Facts out before we do that? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council I think it's a good idea to table it to a date certain. Whether or not we will be in a position to finalize all of those things at that point in time I don't know, but you can always table it back one more meeting and this kind of keeps it in attention, and I think it's probably a good motion. Corrie: Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 19 11. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 1.2 ACRES BY ROBERT F. BEEDE - 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: Corrie: Comments from staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I don't see Mr. Beede here. I don't know if he has had an opportunity to look at the development agreement. I did not specifically request a development agreement. However, the Council can require that as a condition of the annexation. The reason I wasn't so concerned about a development agreement is that it's already existing. They are proposing some additions. Mr. Beede has been very cooperative in trying to meet whatever the city's needs are. If you remember the reason he's requesting annexation is because although he exists as a commercial business at this time he is not zoned to allow an expansion without either an additional conditional use permit or rezoning in the county and so he elected to hook up to city water service and become part of the city. Mr. Gigray may have additional information on the development agreement. Corrie: Any other staff report? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as I understood the action taken by the Council at the last meeting, I believe you wrestled with the idea of whether you needed a development agreement or not and as I understood the action was not to do so. So what you have before you are Findings which go through the same litany in terms of Findings of Fact with regards to your authority and the public hearing and notice and so on. You'll see in Finding number three, proposed Findings, you will incorporate the Findings and Conclusions of Law and the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission except you are amending and accepting finding number 19.2 and I'm referring to their findings to - it's just that detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant for improvement upon the subject property. This provides that they would be reviewed and approved by Planning and Zoning Commission and that all city ordinances be complied with and then under conclusions of law we're making the same findings there in that proposal. Then under the decision and order, you'll see in part three there that a detailed site plans are to be prepared and then this specifies the conditions of those detailed site plans, which starts with 3.1 through 3.11 which were what I found in the record were conditions that would have been considered for a development agreement. Corrie: So we can approve the final action on that and eliminate item 12; is that correct? Bird: Item 12 wouldn't need to be on the agenda would it Mayo~? ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 20 Corrie: No, we can just take it off. Gigray: And I can understand why those would be on there because those recommendations have come out of Planning and Zoning giving you the option either to go to detailed site plan route or through a development agreement and this was just one you took specific action on as I read the record. Corrie: So item number 11 we can use the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision Order granting - any further discussion? I'll entertain a motion on item number 11. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting annexation and zoning application subject to the conditions stated for the property at 800 W. Overland Road. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting annexation and zoning application subject to conditions stated in the motion. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: BIRD, YEA. ANDERSON, YEA. ROUNTREE, YEA. BENTLEY, YEA. MOTION CARRIED: All yeas. Corrie: With that being the case we can eliminate item number 12 on the agenda. 12. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that item number 12 on our agenda be deleted. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to delete item number 12 the development agreement 800 W. Overland Road. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 21 13. ORDINANCE #811 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING 800 W. OVERLAND ROAD: Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, again this is an ordinance that's been prepared for annexation and zoning designation of light industrial for this particular application. My cautionary on this one is that I'd want to make sure that the Public Works Director is satisfied that the legal description is appropriate. I don't know that he's had an opportunity to review that. Whether he affirms that it is, again, if that's the case, you could simply follow the procedure you did on the first one and sponsor it, read it, put it on the agenda for passage at the next meeting pending its approval of the legal description. Corrie: Gary, comment. Smith: I have not reviewed the legal description, Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Council can - Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we continue action on item 13 Ordinance #811 until our next regularly scheduled meeting January 19th, 1999 and have first reading of the ordinance this evening. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to have Ordinance #811 read by title and receive as the first reading sponsored by Mr. Rountree. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Berg: (ORDINANCE #811 WAS READ.) 14. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.30 ACRES BY QUEENLAND ACRES, INC. - ~ MILE WEST OF OVERLAND FROM MERIDIAN-KUNA ROAD SOUTH SIDE BORDERING WEST SIDE OF RO-HO ENT.: Corrie: Staff report. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as you directed by reason of your action at the last Council meeting which effected a denial of the request for annexation and zoning in light of that directive have prepared for your consideration these Findings Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 22 of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order of denial. As you will see by going through this the Finding which is the most relevant with regards to your action has to do with the finding regarding the compatibility of this particular zone request as being inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the city and that is contained in finding number 16. The other findings that are here are consistent with the information which in 17-- also deals with the inconsistency which has to do with the designation of this property on the Comprehensive Plan generalized land use map which shows presently single family residential. As a condition of zoning is that the zoning has to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Corrie: All right. Any other comments from staff? Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order of denial for the application for annexation of Queenland Acres, Inc. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order of denial on the request for annexation and zoning of Queenland Acres, Inc. Any further discussion? Hearing none, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: BIRD, YEA. ANDERSON, YEA. ROUNTREE, YEA. BENTLEY, YEA. MOTION CARRIED: ALL YEAS. 15. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF .96 ACRES (OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK) BY RAY ROBNETT - 3036 LANARK STREET: Gigray: As I recall my comment on this one is that there was a question concerning whether or not this would require a development agreement or whether or not it would be subject to approval of the site plan. We went ahead and prepared one just in case. (Inaudible) Bird: Mra Mayor I was under the impression that we had done the same - this is already developed subdivision. I didn't think it went with the development agreement which I realize is the next agenda item. It says in here that on 3.14 that this is contingent upon a development agreement, but I thought we had waived that. I might be wrong. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 23 Corrie: I think we wrote it here that the applicant complies with all the city requirements. Such agreement will not be needed. I think he has in this case. Bird: 3.14 a development agreement should be required as a condition of annexation. Corrie: Shari any other questions of staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I think the only real issue that remained on this was the ditch issue and having staff and the applicant get together and work with whoever is in charge of that drain to determine the best course of action for future piping or non piping of that entire drainage area. That was the only ordinance requirement that there seemed to be a question on. Rountree: Shari or Gary refresh my memory so I can have it on tape, what's the size of pipe that we've normally deferred requiring tiling on? Is it 48? Stiles: It's 48 inch, and I think Nampa Meridian said it required a 36 inch pipe, but we still have questions about the recharge from the ground water in that I don't think Nampa Meridian even knows what kind of flow they really have. Rountree: I'm sure they don't. Bird: Mr. Mayor. Shari I don't believe that is not an irrigation ditch. That's a drain ditch isn't it that runs down there? There's water running in it year round. Stiles: It is - Bird: Something to do with the aquifer and stuff like a lot of the ground water coming to it and it fills. Stiles: It may be that some of the property owners in that area want to pipe it so they can reclaim that area because it is so deep and it does take - if they elected they could use that area, but I don't know that the staff would recommend doing that at this time without doing some research into it. Bird: I thought somebody said something about we needed to get the engineer of BLM or somebody in there to find out about that. Was it you Gary that mentioned that we need to get or Charlie? Rountree: I did and I don't know if that's been investigated either by Gary or Mr. - Smith: As I understand it it's not under the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers. Bruce Freckleton checked with Corps and it's not theirs. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 24 Bird: Whose ditch is it Gary? Smith: Well Nampa Meridian claims jurisdiction on it as far as maintenance goes, and you're right Councilman Bird. It is a subterranean drain and it is called the Evans Drain and it does have water in it year round and that's its function. If it was ever piped the pipe would need to be water gathering pipe, rather than just a water conveying pipe. At this point we don't really know what size pipe it would take. Nampa Meridian has said at one time that they did know. Then we received correspondence not too long ago from them that they don't know. I've asked for a clarification on that from their superintendent, but I haven't heard anything from him yet. Bird: Gary, in your professional opinion do you think 36 inch pipe would handle that? That's a pretty - Smith: I guess opinions are plentiful and everyone has one. Bird: We can all be lawyers and have all kinds of opinions. Smith: I don't know that I could add any value to the conversation by venturing one Councilman Bird. I really don't know. The highway department, ITD, saw fit to reportedly install a 60 diameter culvert under Eagle Road, and I'm sure that they did that for some reason, and I don't know what it was, but for Nampa Meridian to come back and say we could do this in a 36 diameter pipe, I'm not sure what that comment is based upon. Bentley: As I stated in the previous meeting, we've already gone to the extent of having people bond. RC Willey's bonding for the same ditch, and I think that's the only thing we can do until we find out for sure what the requirement is going to be. Smith: Mr. Mayor one other thing that I might just toss out on the table. We are dealing with Nine Mile Drain to the south and west of this site, and on that drain because it was under the Corps of Engineers jurisdiction, we were very specific that no piping was allowed because of the reason that it is a drain, that it is accepting subsurface subterranean waters, and I don't know. There may have been some wildlife issues. I don't recall that specifically, but I do know that the Corps was very specific about not allowi"ng it to be piped, and in looking at the two ditches, this is Evans Drain is much more of a drain than the Nine Mile Drain is at that point. Corrie: Any other questions? All right I'll entertain a motion. I need to ask Mr. Gigray is that 3.14 need to be in there or taken out? ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 25 Bird: It's pretty clear Mayor. It says that as long as he complies with the city ordinance that we don't need a development agreement which the next item we would probably take care of that anyway. Gigray: I would need some direction from the Council because if you choose not to go with the development agreement route and you're determined to go the other way, then you're going to want to change part three of the decision and order because it says that the developer will enter into a development agreement and then there are all these series of conditions here. If this were a matter of presenting site plans for approval by Planning and Zoning, you could use the same language we used in the other one and you would just direct as part of your decision that that introductory phrase would be changed to that other language and then I would just resubmit this with that other language in there. In other the site approval by Planning and Zoning is - this was another one where it was submitted to either go by site approval or development agreement. Bird: We had approved to go by site development in the original had we not? Okay my motion has to delete the development agreement? Gigray: Yeah, you would just part three the introductory phrase here of the decision and order you would - Rountree: Mr. Mayor related to the discussion that we had about the piping, I'm not so sure that required piping is a good idea in that particular body of water, but to clarify the point in the findings, I would recommend that on page 5, item 16.12 last sentence of that paragraph, the first recommendation would be to spell Corps correctly. Spell check didn't catch that one. The last line engineers or the developer, insert or the developer provides an engineering study that the tile size would be 48 inches, tile size would be 48 inches or greater, or (inaudible) sufficient bond for future tiling. Make the same verbiage change on page 21 paragraph 3.12. Gigray: Yeah. Rountree: I'm giving the owner some more options. (I naud ible) Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting application for the annexation and zoning for the applicant Ray Robnett 3036 Lanark Street deleting all references to development agreement and inserting the appropriate language that would substitute for the development agreement lead ins and including the verbiage changes in paragraph 16.12 on page five paragraph 3.12 on page 21. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 26 Bird: Second. Corrie: Okay motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order granting application of annexation and zoning on item number 15 with the deletions and insertions of the appropriate language as made in the motion. Gigray: Mr. Mayor point of information just to ensure that I would be following the action of the Council, what I would propose to do then would be to change the phrase in part three of the decision and order to read detailed site plans are to be prepared by the applicant of any improvement upon subject real property be reviewed and approved by Planning and Zoning Commission which plans will be complied with as follows and then it would just be that list. If that's what you wish to do. Rountree: I think it's superfluous and redundant that it cites "development" but yeah. That would be correct. (Inaudible - off the microphone) Corrie: You're not going to change anything. You just want to comment on it. Any further discussion on the motion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Robnett: Yeah, just to keep me from having to call Shari up at 8:00 in the morning and explain all this to me. So I have the option of posting a bond for the ditch. I don't feel that it's economical to hire somebody to go out there to do a study. We've got everybody from we don't want the ditch tiled at all to a 60 inch pipe; is that correct? So that I can just post a performance bond for it. Now I have spoken with the gentleman at Nampa Meridian Irrigation, Bill Henson, and what their standard requirement is for that ditch is 36 inch concrete reinforced non-jointed fabric cloth gravel packed pipe. It's not just a matter of throwing in a 36 inch pipe. They want the water to be able to infiltrate. They want it semi-purified when it comes in and everything, and I've done this very elementary. I went to the gentleman. He's very aware of the project. He knows exactly where I'm at. He's been out there, and with that information I went to MASCO, who is a reputable contractor here in town and got them to give me an estimate on doing all of the above. Concrete reinforced pipe, gravel pack, filtration, cloth and everything. Can I use that estimate based on if it's tied to lot and block and width of the lot. There was some indication that it needed to go 20 feet passed and I asked Nampa Meridian and they said no, that's not their requirement. They're not even actually requiring the ditch to be covered at this time. They did say that they would find it very cumbersome if one Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 27 guy did his, three stores down the next guy did his, and they would like to see if and when it ever got done that it be done from Eagle Road in a continuous manner until you got to another open space. And do when I post the owner of the property will post a letter of credit and is Meridian City the beneficiary of that letter or is it more specific Nampa Meridian? Bird: The City - Robnett: And the other plans and specifications the other requirements that were on there, then I submit those to Shari Stiles or the building department? Bird: Public Works. Robnett: Just that you and I have gone over it and everything is pretty much okay, but there was a request in there for submitting a set of plans. Stiles: Are you talking plans for the ditch itself? Robnett: No, plans for the building to check our setbacks - Stiles: That's done, it's in place, everything else is -- Robnett: Fine, okay. Corrie: I have one question for Mr. Rountree. Your insertion that under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers the developer provide the size which would be 48 inch or greater post a significant bond. Is that just a letter from him say it would be? Is that what you are asking? Rountree: Yeah if he could provide a letter from an engineering firm or Idaho Transportation Department if they do the study and say it needs to be 60 inches. That's public rec'ord if you could supply that to the City. That would be great information. That wouldn't cost you more than a phone call. Robnett: Well I might do that - I looked I mean I've been out there for five months looking at that project, and I too just have an opinion. But it looks like if you put a 36 inch pipe with no irrigation in there, it would be half full right now today. So there's a significant amount of water going through there. Thank you. Bird: Thank you Ray. 16. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 28 Corrie: Council, I'll entertain a motion as far as the development agreement then in this case. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we (End of Tape) I move that we take item 16 the development agreement for Olson Bush Industrial Park off the agenda. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Bentley that we take item number 16 the development agreement Olson Bush Industrial Park off the agenda. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 17. ORDINANCE #812 -ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF OLSON BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK: Corrie: Mr. Gigray, comment. Gigray: Again Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, as a safety valve I would appreciate this being maybe sponsored and maybe put on the agenda and make sure the Public Works is happy with the legal description. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have a question for Gary. Had you had an opportunity to look at the legal description on this one? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, Councilman Rountree, I think have - I think my associate has reviewed this. We've been to be pretty careful with these, and we are requiring that they be submitted by a licensed land surveyor as one of our ordinance requirements. But I can't say for certain. I will make sure that I check that so that on your second reading I will have that verified. Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that the Meridian City Council pass Ordinance #812 annexation and zoning of Olson Bush Industrial Park and for the public readings of tonight 1/19/99 and 2/2/99. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Bentley to have Ordinance #812 first reading 1/5/99. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 29 Corrie: Mr. Clerk would you read Ordinance #812 title only? Berg: Thank you Mr. Mayor. (ORDINANCE #812 WAS READ TITLE ONLY) Corrie: Okay that concludes the first reading of Ordinance #812. The second reading to be January 19th, 99. Before we start on the public hearings, ('II entertain a motion to have a ten minute recess. Bentley: So moved. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and second. All those in favor say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. (TEN MINUTE RECESS TAKEN) 18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR GENERAL AUTO REPAIR & SERVICE BY JOHN BISS - WEST OF MERIDIAN ROAD: Corrie: I'll open the public hearing and at this time I'll have staff give a report. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council you requested that this be placed back up for a public hearing because of some of the issues that remained with the extension of Pinwood Street. The (inaudible) of the entire parcel of property that was not shown on the conditional use permit and Mr. Biss is here tonight to answer any questions you may have. Corrie: Since this is a public hearing, I invite the applicant's representative to speak. Name and address please. Biss: It's John Biss, current place of business is 1334 E. First Street, Meridian. Corrie: Okay anything you want to tell us about your request? Biss: Just answer your questions you got. Corrie: Council, questions of Biss? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Biss and Shari as well, I think one of the biggest issues we had was the landscaping and the setback or buffer strip if you will on that particular ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 30 corridor. I think we have 35 feet. That's what has been talked about with you, and you have difficulty in providing that given the layout of the lot and - Biss: I don't really have difficulty providing it. The only real problem I have is they're not asking that of everybody on Meridian Road. They just approved a development straight across the street for only 15 feet. It's my understanding there's only two people that's asked for the 35 feet, and that's the one piece of property that I bought half of and Norm Fuller owns the other half, so that's the only piece of property they they're going to ask the 35 feet of landscaping on. I just thought it's going to look funny with 35 feet of landscaping in front of my place and the person beside me only having 15 feet and across the street only having 15 feet. Rountree: You don't have any problem providing landscaping consistent with what's adjacent to you or what may be adjacent to you? Biss: No. Rountree: Okay. Biss: In fact my original findings show 20 feet because Shari said that would be fine but then you come back and say 35 is what had been requested in the annexation of the property. Rountree: We also have some information from the Public Works Department about the need of an easement in order to get hook ups for city water and sewer. Biss: The gentleman that I bought the property from still owns the property of the easement actually. There's a 50 foot easement there now for Pinwood Street that may or may not go through some day, but I've got verbal permission for the easement for the sewer. I have an easement agreement that I have access to that property, but I guess I need another easement agreement for the sewer. Rountree: A question for probably Gary or Shari, do we have documentation that identifies that easement? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council, Councilman Rountree I think there is documentation concerning the 50 foot wide ingress egress easement. It's identified I believe as an access easement. I believe that's all we have or all that's available. Rountree: And would that be sufficient for the utilities or do the utilities have to be outside of that easement? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 31 Smith: I would have to read the easement and see what it says specifically. If it's an exclusive easement to access only, then it wouldn't be sufficient. At least I don't believe it would from a legal standpoint and Mr. Gigray could probably address that better than I, but the easement would be between Mr. Biss and the property owner, N & D, I believe. Biss: Back when they were building the road, I called both the City of Meridian Public Works and they had me call the civil engineer, and they told me I got an 8 inch water and 8 inch main being stubbed into the property. What they didn't tell me is that was a main line that they planned on going back through Pinwood Street so somewhere along the line somebody has got planned for an 8 inch sewer and water going through Pinwood Street. I would assume that they had plans and permission to do 50. Rountree: That's alii have. Bentley: On your diagram that's done by your architect, Rendition, they show a temporary entrance off of S. Meridian Road. Biss: Yes. Bentley: Okay and that's between two landscape - Biss: Right. Bentley: If and when Pinwood goes through, are you going to change your access to Pinwood? Biss: At t~e time that I sold the property to the highway district, I took what I thought was substantially less than the property was worth for a trade for a guarantee to access to my property. And then later the Ada County Highway District says they want that to be a temporary, so they granted a temporary approach upon future redevelopment of that property. Only at that point in time would they ask that approach to be changed, and that's only if Pinwood Street ever went through, and Pinwood Street is still a big if. Bentley: Okay. My question is when Pinwood goes through, are you going to close the temporary access with landscaping to match what's existing? Biss: At this point in time, I'm not planning on closing it at all. I don't have any plans to do any more development, so I don't - my agreement with the highway district anyway is that I won't have to worry about that unless I plan to do further development on my property. ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 32 Bentley: But the one thing I'd like to see is if that development occurs and your entrance changes, that this temporary be closed in with landscaping to match what's there. Biss: If in deed the temporary driveway has to be closed, yeah, we'd have to do something with it. Bentley: Thank you. Corrie: Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Corrie: Okay, thank you. Anyone else for this development request for conditional use permit to speak tonight? Anybody against the conditional use permit? Okay, hearing nobody else asking for public hearing request I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item number 18. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we close the public hearing for item 18, John Biss's conditional use permit. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to close the public hearing on item 18 request for conditional use permit by Mr. John Biss. Council you have before you make a motion to either accept, deny or change the - I'm sorry. All those in favor of the motion close the hearing say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Discussion? I guess we need a discussion before we make a motion. Rountree: I have none. Mr. Mayor I would move that we direct the city attorney to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions and Order of decision on the request for conditional use permit by Mr. John Biss, and that the Findings of Fact reflect a favorable action on the part of the city for the conditional use permit and that the permit be conditioned with concerns addressed by the City Planning and Zoning Director, Stiles, as it relates to landscaping ,along Meridian Road and the points of access as discussed by Councilman Bentley. Bentley: Second. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 33 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley on the motion to have the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as stated in the motion. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 19. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 7.84 ACRES BY PAUL A. HOFFMAN (MERIDIAN PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH) - SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND USTICK: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite any staff reports. (Inaudible) Gigray: I have submitted to you Mr. Mayor and members of the Council a memo regarding this particular agenda item. My review of this file in preparation for this meeting, I have some concern regarding the action the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended a designation of L-O, limited office district, and I believe the application was submitted for a low density residential district, which is R-4. That would be a material change in the notice that would have been provided for the public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission, which the requirements of Idaho Code are that you have to renotice the public hearing, and I believe the process should also include that there were going to be hearing and a recommendation of limited office district that the applicant should make an amendment to their application for that district. I recommend in this memo a procedure as you will see under recommendations for the Mayor and Council to follow in this matter to ensure number one that I have interpreted the record appropriately which I believe that Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning, as well as the City Clerk could answer those questions, and then you may want to determine if the applicant has a representative here, what their position about amending their application, and then I recommend that you remand it back to Planning and Zoning. That the applicant amend their application, that there would be a staff report on the amended application which of course one of the analyses that we have to have is whether or not the application and the zoning designation is in conformance with the camp plan, and also that notice is given to the neighboring property owners as well as to the published notice of the zoning designation that would be recommended and sought, and I must disclose for the record that I'm a Presbyterian and a member of Boon Memorial Presbyterian Church. I make this recommendation (inaudible). Corrie: City Clerk, Planning and Zoning are these facts stated correct? What we have in this file I guess that it was advertised L-Q and people had the neighboring property owners was R-4? Is that correct? Stiles: It was advertised as R-4. Bird: This being ran through as an L-Q now? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 34 Corrie: (Inaudible) Berg: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, the application did have R-4. My understanding is with confrontation with the Planning and Zoning Director during public hearing processes that they thought an L-O zoning would be more appropriate, but the application does have an R-4 zoning. If I'm not mistaken, I thought that was the conversation at the hearings. Corrie: All right. Is the applicant here? I guess - Hoffman: Paul Hoffman, 3235 N. Mountain View Drive, Boise, 83704. Mayor and Councilmen, I want to ask Shari when I made the application I believe that you pointed out in the hearing that the zoning I indicated on there didn't exist for .Meridian, because on the application I took a zoning classification from Ada County at which point then the discussion because okay, what is the appropriate zoning application for this location, and at that time it was brought to my attention that the parcel across the street, which is the new park was an L-O zone and also in the zoning book a church is a permitted use in an L-O zone and for those two reasons we said okay well let's make it an L-Q zone, and that's where that went. Was that accurate? Stiles: The request was made for an R-4 zone, however, churches are not permitted in that zone. But we did discuss was it an L-Q would permit a church. However I think that we probably need to look at a split zoning for because I don't think it's appropriate that we would zone that corner L-O because it's not intended for an office development and that's not the use that you are proposing. You are proposing a residential development so we may be looking at a split zoning that you need to apply for. Hoffman: Thank you. Did you folks understand that the corner lot is like one plus acres, so anyway that particular issue, that's my understanding. However the Council recommends we proceed, I believe I would be open to that. Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, I just want to augment my advice here, and I think this is the first time since I've been here this type of issue has come up and just not only for this situation, but for future direction the Planning and Zoning and for the City Council, I always think it's best that the applicant, that the Planning and Zoning Commission make their rulings on the applicant's application. Either they recommend that it be or not recommend. You can receive this as a recommendation of denial of their application of R-4 and then proceed with the public hearing on that basis. The reason for my instruction here was so that the applicant understood that the better application or that they ought to amend their application when you remand it back then they can take appropriate action to amend it so when Planning and Zoning takes it up again, it's under a new application, and what has happened in this instance is I believe ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 35 this has caused some confusion which is understandable. No one has intended anything by that is that you get notices that go out to one that says it's a public hearing for an application for limited office and another one goes out saying that it's for an R-4 and anytime there's a material change in an application you have to renatice everything to whatever that change is. Hoffman: Are you speaking to the notice that's posted on the building? Gigray: There's a number of notices. There's a notice on the building. There's a notice to affected property owners within 300 feet, and there's also a notice that's published in the paper, and as I understand the record in this instance that we have notices that were sent in the mail that may not have been the same as were published in the paper, and in any event for this Council to consider an application for an L-Q zone, unless the notice went out that way, we would have a problem, and the developer does not want to have an application process with a procedural problem because then it's subject to challenge and that doesn't do anybody any good. Corrie: So if I'm reading this correctly we should cancel this public hearing recommend it back to the Planning and Zoning for the specific recommendations then that you mentioned here. Gigray: Right and I'd also recommend it as you've already done is have the applicant at least be able to address the Council knowing what the advice that you've received is. They may decide no we don't want to do this. We want the public hearing (Inaudible) position is. Bird: Mr. Mayor I got a question for Mr. Gigray. Is he wants - they're talking about an R-4 and an L-O zone there. His new application should show that, shouldn't it? Gigray: Absolutely. Bird: So if you're coming back and wants (inaudible) if you're going to do some residential developing in there and not limited office, then you've got to file as both zonings on the property. Hoffman: I think Shari's recommendation is based on the fact that we have residential on the corner. Not so much that we're going to develop residential, but that it's already there and that's fine. I don't believe there would an objection to that. I guess what's going through my mind now it's not so much this issue but we were before Planning and Zoning twice and now to go back and revisit this whole issue again. There were a whole number of other issues that need to be addressed before you, and I'm wondering okay procedurally are we just talking about that particular issue or am I having to revisit Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 36 the whole thing with Planning and Zoning again. You know there are other conditions that the Planning and Zoning Department recommended that we - Bird: Start over and make new so you will have the whole ball of wax again. Gigray: I mean that can be part of the record. It's not like you start with new information. Sorry Mr. Mayor. I believe that the new application and staffing is going to of course build on what's already there. It's not like you're really starting all over again, but the problem we have and my advice to the City Council and to the Mayor is that we have a state statute that very specific about notice and we have state supreme court decisions that say if notice isn't filed in accordance with that statute, it's a due process issue and if anybody challenges it, they go to court and you can pass an ordinance and you'll get the ordinance vacated and you'll be back where you started all over again, so we know there's a procedural problem at this point. So the best thing to do is send it back so that that can be corrected. Whether or not the church wishes to amend its application or says no, we want R-4 or nothing. They can take that position, but whether anyway you look at it, we got a notice problem at this point. The only way to fix it is to send it back. Hoffman: One other related issue. It's my understanding now this was a couple of years ago that I looked at the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. That intersection is slated for strictly residential. So it was somewhat a surprise to me if it's accurate to learn that the park was zoned L-O because I know there wasn't any to my knowledge the church owners didn't receive any notice about the change to the comprehensive plan, so I guess what I'm asking is how did that happen you know because if you look at it that property isn't slated to be L-O. It's just residential. Now if we go in and ask for an L-O and somebody looks at the comprehensive plan, and say well L-O is not part of the comprehensive plan. Now we're going to be asked to apply for that particular procedure of changing the master plan. Can somebody speak to that what's going on there? Corrie: Okay Mr. Gigray go ahead and then Mr. Bentley. Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, Mr. Hoffman, whatever action has been taken with regards to any previous matters, I don't have any personal knowledge with regards to that. I would say if there were procedural issues affecting that particular action, if the time period has run since that action has taken, then it would be moot at this point. It doesn't make any difference. What in your situation I think your best advice is to talk to your people who were advising you about the development of this particular site, review the ordinances of this city and the comp plan and make your best judgment about what the most appropriate application is based on your intended use of that property. We could not - I would not and I have instructed staff to give information about the application of our ordinances of what is permitted and what is not permitted, but the actual decision where maybe you could go this way or you could go that way ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 37 always has to be up to the applicant as to what is in their best interest. At this point what you're dealing with from my perspective and my advice to the City Council is a procedural problem. That is an application was made for an R-4. That was heard and then there was a recommendation to the City Council that it be not zoned R-4 but it be zoned L-O. So then that's a material change from the application and if the commission is seeking to make a recommendation to change that application to something else, then it ought to be renoticed to have a hearing because if the law didn't provide for that, it would be like you'd come in and say I want R-4 and the commission and the City Council will change it light industrial. I'd get a notice that it's going to be R-4 and I'm not opposed to that. I live next door, don't go to the hearings, and I don't care, and the next thing I know I've got a light industrial zone next to me and I'm going to scream bloody murder, so that's why that law is set up that way so if there are material changes the neighboring property owners, the person who the law recognizes have an interest and entitled to notice have an opportunity to address that specific question and what happened here is we ended up with a material change and then we have a notice that goes out part of it is in accordance with the original application. Part is with the recommendation of Planning and Zoning Commission and so we have a problem there too. The only way to correct it and because our law says the commission and the governing body, which is the City Council have to if there's a material change renotice it and my legal opinion and advice to this Council and Mayor we have no choice then to send it back. Corrie: Shari did you have a comment? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council the only comment I had was regarding the park site. If you would like me to go into that, I will. Bentley: In light of the discussions we've had with the Counselor, I'd move we cancel this public hearing and remand this application for annexation and zoning by Paul .Hoffman for Meridian Presbyterian Church back to P & Z so they can clean up the zoning Issue. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to cancel the public hearing and remand this matter back to the Planning and Zoning Commission with specific recommendations. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Counselor since the motion was to cancel the public hearing, do we need to have a motion on it or was that it right there? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 38 Gigray: Weill believe the motion that was in order would be to remand it back. I'll just prepare an order for your signature in light of that. (Inaudible) Bird: He closed it with the motion didn't he? Corrie: All right. Thank you. 20. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE OF APPROXIMATELY 4.296 ACRES FOR PROPOSED SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC - SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and staff report. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council this is the remainder of what used to be known as the Scottsdale Subdivision which was an R-15 zone. Currently there exists there the castle known as Dreamland Child Care Center and the remainder of the property they are proposing to develop as an L-O Subdivision. Staff has no outstanding issues. We've received response from the applicant on our concerns and we are confident they will comply with our conditions as recommended. Corrie: Anyone else have comments? Okay this is a public hearing. I invite the representative of the Scottsdale Subdivision. Elg: Van Elg, Briggs Engineering, 1800 W. Overland Road, Boise, Idaho. Do I need to be sworn? Oh, you're not doing that anymore? (Inaudible) Elg: Representing the developers of this Scottsdale Subdivision which includes a rezone and a preliminary plat application. The property is located you may be more familiar with the Dreamland Daycare Facility. Some people refer to it as the castle out there on Franklin Road. It's located in that general area. The daycare facility is located here, and Will this is the same board that we presented at P & Z so you have all of this documentation in your record. We've requested a rezone. The property is currently zoned R-15, which is a high density residential zone. That's for higher density residential development, multi family dwellings and so forth. To the east we have some four-plex units. I believe this property is zoned R-8 and to the south and the west, we have a zoning of R-4. To the north we have C-G and I-L so this is kind of an anomaly in the area right here with this R-15 zoning, which allows for such high density residential. ( ( I Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 39 In talking with the client, we suggested that he request a rezone to L-Q for a couple of reasons. The first being that if we were to come in with an R-15 zone request right here and multi family, we felt that we probably would meet with some very significant opposition of any surrounding owners especially these folks here in the Finnway Park and Crestwood Subdivisions to the south and west. We were surprised to find out that even the people in the four-plex units were quite concerned about any density even four-plex development occurring in this area, some of the comments we received. With that in mind we looked at the L-Q and that serves very well as a transition zone by definition in the Meridian City Ordinance between such uses and the client agreed to that suggestion. We then requested that we hold a neighborhood meeting although it's not required by the City of Meridian. We felt it would be advantageous to get polls of the folks out there in that area. We did that and we sent to about 70-80 letters to surrounding property owners. I think that information is submitted in your packets also. Of those 70-80 letters that we sent out and invited to the neighborhood meeting, one person attended, lived here in Crestwood, and we have a comment from him and a statement from him that says he has no opposition to the project as shown in the preliminary plat. We received a number of phone calls from folks with varied requests. Some wanting pathways and interconnections here so that they could access a daycare. We can get into some of that in the preliminary plat discussion, but the primary concern was that they even the four plex units which are two story, they were concerned that they would be looking down on an unsightly development. So I tried to reassure them that the type of development that will be constructed will be very pleasing and pleasant, and the client went out and took pictures of developments that he believes this site looks very similar to these types of professional buildings and I might point out that that's what they intend to do is professional office type complexes. Dental offices, doctors offices, attorney's offices, no. (I naud ible) Elg: Anyway, they'll be pleasant and attractive. If youJre familiar with the Ustick Road between Cole and Maple Grove, there's a number of dental offices and things. That's where most of these were taken from, and that's what he intends to model his project after also. There's a chance that he may build one or two of the buildings as a marketing - to market the project first and get the thing off the ground and get it started. I don't know where he's at on that. But that was initial discussions was what he was pondering. With that I guess I can close my comments on the rezone. If you have any comments of me, I'd be glad to address them. Corrie: Council any questions? Bird: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 40 Rountree: I have none. Corrie: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else from the public who would like issue testimony in this hearing? Hearing none, I will request a motion to close the public hearing. Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion we close the public hearing. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Rountree to close the public hearing on the rezone for the Scottsdale Subdivision. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Discussion, motion? Bird: Mr. Mayor I move that the Meridian City Council approves the rezoning as requested by Wolfe Commercial Enterprises on 4.296 acres for proposed Scottsdale Subdivision. Corrie: And do you want to propose that the attorney draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law? Bird: And the attorney to draw up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird second by Mr. Anderson to approve the request for rezone of the Wolfe Commercial Enterprise and to direct the attorney to draw up the approval of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 21. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SCOTTSDALE SUBDIVISION BY WOLFE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, LLC - SOUTH SIDE OF W. FRANKLIN ROAD: Corrie: I'll open the public hearing and staff reports, Shari on this one. Meridian City Council January 51 1999 Page 41 Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council staff has no problems with this subdivision provided they comply with our recommendations of our memo December 4th, 1998. Corrie: Any further staff comments? Then I will invite the representative from the Scottsdale Subdivision to testify. Elg: Thank you. I guess I'd incorporate my comments of the rezone into this one. Sorry, Van Elg, Briggs Engineering, 1800 W. Overland Road, and yes. I'd incorporate my comments from the rezone into this application also at this time, and then add some regarding the preliminary plat. In the original application we had not included some things that the City requested during a Planning and Zoning Commission. Since that time we've modified this plan and resubmitted it, and I believe Shari that you have a copy of that now. Did you get the revised one? I believe we sent ten copies. It's dated 12/16/98. Stiles: 17? Elg: Right about the surveyor's signature there, there should be a 12/16. Bird: 12/16/98. Elg: Okay in that we addressed the comments that the Planning and Zoning Commission had, and they did have some changes to those staff comment letter that Shari just referred to. In general we agreed' with all of the comments of staff. We did agree to go ahead amend it. We had suggested originally that the sewer line and the (inaudible) that would be provided through this area here be allowed to be placed under an easement rather than a separate lot. But Bruce prevailed on us and we agreed to take that as a separate lot. (Inaudible) came up with a good suggestion. I don't know why we didn't think of it first, but he suggested that we take the drainage out of this lot here and place it underneath the sidewalk which we agreed to do and that seems to work fine for us. So you'll see that this is now lot drainage is located here. We've also included setbacks that Shari request. 25 foot along Franklin Road I think it was Shari. We've also shown the irrigation easements that were requested by the Nampa Meridian Irrigation District along the front. As you can see that's going to kind of chip away at some of that building size up on that north end of the project, but that's okay. We can deal with that. Keep in mind that any of the buildings that you see here are purely conceptual. We were just drawing them in to see how we could fit it in. If we could make it work with the lots. The developer may come in with something completely different. We tried to show parking and how we could fit if those lots were reasonable in size to accommodate a reasonable building and still provide one parking space per 400 square feet of office area. We batted around a number of design issues on this. We considered larger lots. But then realized if we did that, that the developer could come in and place two story units here and that that may cause some difficulty. It's highly Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 42 unlikely even if we had the larger lots the developer would put the two story units in this area. I just don't think it's very economical for them. The nature of these types of professional buildings is typically single story, but in any event we batted that around some and decided if we went with the smaller lots, we would significantly reduce the capabilities of any of these buildings going up high and we would limit them to single story and still be able to provide adequate parking. There may be some cross access easements and things, which I think ACHD will be happy with anyway with respect to parking and access to parking lots, and the lot owners can deal with those issues. The other thing that we discussed in the Planning and Zoning Commission was staff comments regarding the landscape buffering. This was an issue for some of the people that called. As I said primarily those (End of Tape) Elg: ... wanted to know how we were going to protect them from the unsightly development. I don't think that's the concern, but the - we told them we would provide buffering, and in fact the developer after we discussed it agreed that buffering would be - building buffering into the project right now would be a marketing tool for the resale of the individual lots. So they agreed to provide buffering as part of the platting process. The only thing that we didn't like was a 20 foot requirement and that we construct it immediately. The reason being is that if we construct a 20 foot landscape buffer right now and you can see that this building is pushed right - which is basically the setback and this building is pushed right up against that. When they come in to build that building, they are going to wipe out a good share of that landscaping in trying to just construct the building. So what we suggested is that the developer will construct ten feet as shown on the preliminary plat landscaping and basically what that boils down to and (inaudible) suffice Shari in lieu of submitting any other landscape plans, the developer will construct basically one tree per every lot that fronts on their property boundary in this location here and then various bushes and grass along that boundary along with a fence also. That should provide ample buffering given the nature of the buildings and a significant number of trees along that boundary, and we hope that would suffice for the landscaping plan. In essence some of the lots will have two or three trees, maybe four trees and some will have one or two that they will have to install when they develop. I'm sorry the developer will have to install prior to platting, then the individual lot owners can come in and as stated here, they'll be able to redesign or add to the landscaping as necessary back there. The reason for this is that they may have patios and things that they want to include back there that could go into the buffering area, but if we try to design that now, we preclude them. So allowing them to come in with their own plans and landscaping seems to make good sense for construction and provide them for adequate flexibility. I guess with that I'll close my comments on the preliminary plat for Scottsdale and open myself up for any questions. Corrie: Questions from Council? Bird: I have none. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 43 Rountree: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Corrie: Questions from staff? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, the only comment I would have is I would like to see a landscape plan approved prior to signature on the final plat. I'm not sure that in some instances that two trees in a hundred foot section would be considered adequate buffering. And in regard to the remark about the statement about the patios back there, there is a 20 foot setback there that they would not be able to have any covered patios or they could have maybe a concrete slab or something like that, but they understand no structures would be put in. Elg: Yeah, we just want to make sure that they didn't preclude concrete slabs and so fo rth . Stiles: I would just like the two inch caliper tree per each adjacent residential lot to be taken off there and that the landscape plan that you'd submit to us prior to signature on the final plat. Elg: Okay. Mr. Mayor and Shari, I guess you're referring to the comment under the typical landscape buffer detail? Stiles: Yes. Elg: Would you have another suggestion for the number of trees perhaps - (I naud ible) Stiles: I guess I would just like to see something fairly consistent along there, regular intervals of trees and then maybe you know when you're talking about maybe only having two trees back there and we do have a three inch caliper requirement. Elg: Put a buffer between units? Stiles: Well based on square footage of your asphalt, you know your overall landscape plan. Either that or have something in your covenants that's going to require something more significant than maybe two trees back there. Elg: Weill guess Mr. Mayor and Shari, I guess what I'm getting at is that there's still an additional ten feet of landscaping that will be covered by the individual lot owners, which Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 44 provides them with flexibility. So the trees we're planting isn't going to be all that you are going to see as far as landscaping. There still will be additional landscaping that other ten feet. Anderson: (Inaudible) Elg: They have to review them through Shari, so if Shari says that they have to be trees, they will. Bird: Mr. Mayor, Shari, on the introduction the recommendation to the City Council Planning and Zoning, on page five, 1.5, are you disagreeing with that? What he says is basically wrote up right there. Are we disagreeing now with that concept? Stiles: I'm sorry Mr. Bird, what are you referring to? Bird: Page five Shari, 1.5. Developer to install a ten foot wide planting strip at (Inaudible) an added ten feet, which is what he was talking about trees to be down the entire - could be required prior to obtaining building permits or at time each individual lot is developed. I have to agree with the engineer. If you're going to make him put in a 20 footer on some of those places, he's not going to be able to get around to build the buildings. What we want to see is the finished product after everything is finished, and that's when the landscaping and stuff can come in. Each lot is going to have different landscaping by the way the building and stuff is put up. I don't know Shari, is this 1.15 good enough for you? Stiles: Councilman Bird, Mayor and Council, this was our initial comment that we made and after we made that comment Van had come up with the scenario of going ahead and doing the ten feet and then having the developer do the additional ten feet. I have no problem with that. I would still like to see the landscape plan, which is typical that we require a landscape plan that we can approve prior to signature on the final plat so that they can also bond for those improvements prior to signature on the plat. Bird: I have no problem with that afterwards, but you're in agreement with what this is saying. I mean I have no problem with the requiring the landscaping plans, site plans, but that don't specifically say that in this. Until they start obtaining building permits. Stiles: For the additional ten feet. Bird: Yeah, that's right. Stiles: That's fine. All I'm asking is that you bring something in for that ten feet that the developer is required to - ( (' Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 45 Elg: For the first ten feet? Okay. Bird: Each building is going to sit different and be landscaped different. I mean they're not going to want ten lookalikes I don't believe out there. Corrie: Any other questions? Okay thank you. Elg: Thank you. Anyone else from the public who would like to issue testimony on this request for preliminary plat? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to close the public hearing on request for preliminary plat for Scottsdale Subdivision. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Any discussions? I'll entertain a motion on the request for preliminary plat. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the preliminary plat for Scottsdale Subdivision subject to staff comments and landscape review. Corrie: Do you want to include the attorney to prepare the ordinance? Bentley: Yes, and have the attorney prepare the ordinance and Order of Decision. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. (inaudible) - motion stated. Any further discussion? Rountree: Mr. Mayor would we move forward with this without having approved the rezone? Gigray: This is preliminary plat. Rountree: Still can't plat it without the proper zoning. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 46 Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, the final action we have (inaudible) decision the City of Boise is pretty well - Rountree: I didn't want to hear this Bill. Gigray: The final action would be on the final plat. Rountree: Okay. Gigray: And this is the preliminary. Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 22. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3 BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - NORTH OF PINE & WEST OF LOCUST GROVE: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite staff comments. Shari? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this was an application that was previously submitted as townhouses. However there were some restrictions in the annexation of the property that did not allow attached dwellings. We have made some comments on this application. The plat has not been revised to reflect all the changes required, however, if they comply with the comments as written, I don't see any real issues with this proposal. Corrie: Mr. Smith. Smith: Mr. Mayor, City Council members, I guess the only question that the Public Works still had was what the status was of the pressurized irrigation requirement. That's all I have. Thank you. Corrie: Okay, since we are in a public hearing, I'll invite the representative from the Maws Subdivision. Pavelek: My name is Richard Pavelek. I have offices at 915 W. Jefferson, Tealey's Land Surveying. This development did have a previous life and it was contorted and we did have some surprises in terms of the issue of attached versus detached and the developer still has need of going ahead and he had basically reconfigured the proposal to fit all the ordinance requirements for sizes of the lots, and these will be conventional size lots. At this time we believe that we can meet all the conditions of the approval that Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 47 were recommended to.you by Planning and Zoning Commission. In response to the City Engineer, I thought we had dealt with the irrigation issue previously. We had dug through the Treasurer's receipts and at the time that the property was brought in phases one and two were in fact applied for. The water rights were vacated for the property. Now we can go back through and verify that with the previous records, but my recollection is that in the documents that we had received from the city's treasury office, we had shown that those rights had been vacated. I believe in 1993 and we had provided staff with those reports. If there's something that we've missed, we'll be happy to go back through and deal with that, but my understanding is that monies are paid in to the city for well development rights for the property and the rights to irrigation were removed from the property. So that's my understanding of the situation and between now and the final plat I guess we'll go through this again to make sure that this in fact has been covered. Maybe I should explain. At the time the subdivision was developed the developer had the option by ordinance to either pay a well development fee to the city or to provide pressurized irrigation. At that time the developer chose to exert his right and vacate his irrigation rights. So I believe the current ordinance has been modified since that time. Bird: Gary, is that previous ordinance, do you know anything about this because there is a stipulation in here 1.20 regarding pressurized irrigation. Now whether we approve, disapprove, whatever this 1.20 has got to be taken care of. Smith: The option existed. I don't believe the ordinance has been changed in that regard. The option existed for the Council to require pressurized irrigation or allow the developer to pay the in lieu of pressurized irrigation well development fee. I can't tell you if that happened on this total parcel of ground or not. The property still has water rights. They can be recovered. They petitioned out of the easement, but the water rights still exist and they can be recovered by payment of a fee for the lot sizes. That isn't an impossibility at all. I don't remember when the Council started requiring the pressurized irrigation in lieu of the well development fee, but that has been a policy decision that the Council has made for the past several years to get us out of the domestic water sprinkling of irrigated areas. In terms of whether or not that fee was paid for this entire parcel of ground, we would have to check the records through the treasurer's office. Corrie: That was back in '91 or '92 when I was on the Council. Bird: Mr. Mayor was that a policy to come in even they were not developing the whole thing but to purchase the buyout at that time for the whole thing? I can't believe that the developer would put his money up front for property that he don't plan on developing. ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 48 Smith: That's what I was going to add Councilman and Mayor that typically the developers paid the well development fee for that portion that they were final platting. Bird: I have to agree with that. Smith: That was a condition for signature by myself and City Clerk for the Mayor and City Council. Pavelek: Mr. Mayor I think this is an issue that can be determined. We simply came across a series of receipts, and it would have appeared that it had been paid, but if it hasn't I guess we'll have to deal with that. But at this point in time it's my understanding that they have been paid, but as I say it can remain a condition until the final plat, and we'll deal with it at that time. Bird: The only problem as I read this article and if I'm looking at it thinking right and I could be way off base, but we have to give you a variance from the requirement of not having pressurized irrigation at this time to pass this if I'm reading this right. Pavelek: I don't think so. Gigray: I would - Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, Councilman Bird, as I understand this requirement, it would be a condition of approval of the preliminary plat so this would be a matter of conditions that the applicant would have to meet before final plat was submitted for your approval. And at that point you would probably if they can establish legally that they are not required by reason of some grandfathering to be exempted from this requirement, then I think that would probably come through with a staff report that that information has been supplied. If they can't establish that and they do have to request a variance then they'll make an application for the variance, and that would be processed probably before the final plat. Bird: Let me ask you a dumb question then. This is a preliminary plat, and this is conditions that was passed upon. It don't say anything about the final plat. So you're telling me that we don't have to worry about this in the preliminary plat, that it will be taken care of in the final plat? Why would that be in there then? Gigray: Well what I'm saying is that condition would have to be - there would have to be proof of compliance with that condition and that proof would have to be established by the applicant that they are not required to meet that condition by reason of a legal cause that they would have by the payment of this fee if that were established, or they would have to comply with this condition which is obtain a variance from the city before final plat is approved. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 49 Bird: Mr. Mayor as I understand now and you guys can tell me if I'm off base, but as I understand now we are requiring pressurized systems. Okay. For this preliminary plat all other preliminary plats are based on pressurized systems. Am I not right? And it don't have nothing to do with the final plat. It's the preliminary plat that states it. I just don't understand why this thing is in here stating that we have to make a variance to pass the preliminary plat. It's in the preliminary plat. There's nothing about the final plat. I'm just trying to clear it up for myself. I'm in a daze I guess on this thing. Rountree: Mr. Mayor if I could. I think what it's saying is that in order to approve the way it is requested, we would have to pass a variance. We don't have to approve it the way it was requested. We can approve it that it would meet all the ordinances of the City of Meridian, and they will provide a pressurized irrigation system. Unless they can demonstrate a hardship, then they can submit a request for a variance to the city, which is probably a better way to handle it as opposed to having a condition saying you must approve a variance in order for the pressurized irrigation not to be proposed for this development. Bird: That's what I'm saying Charlie and you said that could pass this variance at final plat, but what you just got through saying makes sense to me. I'm just being dense. Rountree: It's 10:30. (Inaudible) Bird: I just can't figure out why we got it in there if we don't need it. Corrie: Any other questions? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Is there anyone else here from the public who would like to issue testimony in this? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we close the public hearing. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to close the public hearing. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: AI) ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 50 Corrie: Comments, decisions and motions. Are you ready for the motion, have at it. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the preliminary plat for Maws Subdivision NO.3 by Tealey's land Survey subject to staff conditions anq the resolve of the irrigation Issue. Bird: Second. Bentley: And have the attorney prepare the Findings of Facts and Order - prepare the proper Order. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to approve the preliminary plat with conditions and have the attorney prepare the proper order. Further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. 23. REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTSIDE SEATING BY TODD MASON D/B/A MOXIE JAVA -106 E. WilLIAMS: Corrie: Staff. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is a request for outdoor seating at the Moxie Java on Williams and East First Street. The initial site plan that was submitted showed the seating would be on the lawn area adjacent to East First Street. However that was not what the applicant intended. Their intent was to have a couple of table on the north side of the building there adjacent to where the entrance is, and the staff would support that with the condition that a minimum five foot clear walkway be provided at all times. Corrie: Any other staff reports? Any questions from Council? Anderson: I have a question. I guess it's been a while since I looked at this drawing, but I'm somewhat familiar with that building and it almost seems to me like there could be a safety issue there putting seating out there. It seems like there's drive up windows on both sides of the building as well as there's parking out along the far north end of the property so you have cars backing up. You'll have cars turning from one of the drive up windows rounding this. What's going to be out there to protect somebody out there sitting from getting run over? ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 51 Stiles: They're not proposing anything. That's a good point. There probably should be some kind of ballards or something to protect the area, but the applicant can maybe speak to provisions they may make for that. Donman: Jennifer Donman, 2407 Snyder. I wasn't aware that that would be a problem. I don't see why there would be any reason why we couldn't put anything up. Do you have any suggestions? Stiles: Possibly some of the ballards like they have that you put around gas meters or something like that. I don't know if that would be adequate. But at least probably at a couple of strategic points for each side there is probably appropriate. Anderson: I guess I was thinking something a little more attractive like some type of decorative landscaping plan or a big concrete thing or something like that. But it just seems like there would be an awful hazard there to me. Corrie: Do you want staff to get together with them and see what they can do as part of the conditional use. Bird: Mr. Mayor what you're asking us is the staff want to continue the public hearing until the 19th? Corrie: It's not a public hearing. It's just a request for conditional use permit. Bird: Yeah, but it's a public hearing. Corrie: No, it isn't. Bird: Okay. Anderson: I guess it's their liability if someone gets run over, but I guess my opinion maybe staff ought to make some recommendations for some possible solutions or something like that. Corrie: They can do that in your motion for conditional use permit. Any further comments? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none, Mayor. Rountree: None. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 52 Corrie: Okay, I'll entertain a motion on the conditional use permit. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the conditional use permit for outside seating for Moxie Java with the suggestion that they get the staff and come up maybe some sort of safety things to protect themselves in the parking area. Corrie: With Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision? Bentley: Yes and instruct the attorney to provide the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to approve the conditional use permit with the staff giving them recommendations for outside seating and also for the attorney to draw up Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision. Any further comments? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion, say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: So if you will just kind of get with Shari. 24. WATER I SEWER I TRASH DELINQUENCIES: Corrie: (DELINQUENCY READ BY MAYOR) Is there anyone present who wishes to contest their water, sewer and trash delinquency? All right you are hereby informed that you may appeal to have the decision of the city reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off in the amount of the turn off list is $52,046.49. I'll entertain a motion to approve the delinquency turn off list. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the delinquency water turn off list and direct the Mayor to commend staff for the new format that the list has been presented to the Council. It's now readable and we can understand it. Anderson: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson to approve the delinquency turn off listw Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ( \ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 53 25. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. KENNY BOWERS: DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION FOR ARCHITECT SELECTION FOR NEW FIRE STATION: Bowers: This will be short Bentley, about an hour or so. Mayor Corrie and CouncilI'd like to just take a few minutes to give you a little bit of history on our committee that we've put together for this building. We have met for the last four or five months a couple of times each month and on this committee we have full time firefighters, volunteer firefighters. We have city council personnel, we have rural commissioners, and we have P & Z member. Nick Corral has done most of our drawing for us. We went through the building, the plans of what we think the building should look like, and to make it a (inaudible) for out in this area. I'd like to also at this time recognize we do have two rural commissioners out in the audience. Mike Ingram and Steve Bravo clear in the back. On this committee, we had Nick Corral, Brian Zimmerman, Ed Pierce, John Thompson, Malcolm MacCoy, Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Mike Ingram, and Steve Bravo plus myself so we had quite an array of people on the committee. As we got into this about halfway through we found out that there's a state law that we cannot ask for bids for our architectural firms, so we just had to ask if they would send us packets to show us the jobs sites that they have done before and the work that they would be able to do for us. We advertised twice in the Valley News Times. We received all the packets on December 9th. We sent ten out in the mail. Two packets were picked up here at City Hall. But we only received seven packets back. December 16th we met the committee, went through all the packets to see if any of them was in favor of working on our building, giving us some ideas. At that time we had three architectural firms that we thought would do us a good job and had built fire stations or proposed and worked on fire stations before. We were ZGA, Arrowrock, and Olsons and Associates. December 21St, we had all three companies come in and give us a presentation, show us pictures of some of the buildings they had done, give us some ideas of what we can do with the property out there since we're in the hole kind of having to come up to Franklin Road. We listen each one had about an hour with questions and answers afterwards. After they gave their presentations, the committee met and we would like to recommend that ZGA and ourselves try to work out an agreement on a contract of what they would charge us to be the lead firm architectural firm for the fire station, and I guess this is the first time I've done this so I don't know quite what our next step is, but I guess there are quite three or four different ways of doing contracts. They'll go hourly or they will go per bid or they will do different things. So at this time we would like to ask the City Council if they have any questions or any help that we can have to help us out on this. Anderson: So you did not have ZGA prepare a resolution for tonight? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 54 Bowers: No, I did not. I was under the impression that we had to get City Council's approval first before ZGA could come in and give us a proposal. Anderson: I guess that was my understanding is that's how the City Council gives approval is by passing a resolution and they would have you draft that. Bowers: Paul from ZGA was not under that impression either. He said he wanted to get an approval from City Council, and that's what Mayor Corrie had told me also. Bird: I was under the impression they were going to do the same thing that they had done on the city hall thing that Paul was going to draft up a resolution and bring it forward for us to accept. Now we're kicking ourselves down two more weeks. Corrie: Mr. Gigray do you got any comment on this? This would have to go through our legal staff as well a resolution. Gigray: Weill think given where you are at this point given the presentation you could accept the report of the Chief and you could tell him to proceed with ZGA to come with the necessary documents and I hear from Councilman Bird that you want to go in the same direction that you are going with city hall and bring it back to the next meeting for approval. Bird: I know we can't go on the same - all we have to come is standard AlA, contract form between architect and owner, which is the city. It's a standard AlA contract. Now all we have to decide is whether we want to pay them a flat fee, an hourly fee, or a percentage of a bid fee. Most jobs are done on a bid fee completely through. That was my understanding from the meeting we come out of. I don't know if that was Ron's, but however the Council would like to - which way do you want to pay them? Do you want to pay them by the hour or do you want pay them by the job or do you want to pay them by the bid fee, the percent of bid fee? Isn't that the way you got it Ron? Anderson: Yeah. Bird: Was basically what we had to select there? Anderson: Yeah. Bird: Standard AlA owner architect deal there. That's city, school district, everybody uses that form. Anderson: Weill would make a motion that we enter into a contract with ZGA Architects for the architectural drawings for the new fire station and do that on a percent basis of the project. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 55 Bird: I'll second that. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson second by Mr. Bird that we contract with ZGA contract on a percent of the project. Any further discussion? Anderson: I guess my understanding of the percent is that we have the option of going to ZGA and negotiating what that percentage will be and my understanding is that a standard is somewhere around 7 or 80/0 on these types of projects so possibly the committee or a couple of representatives from the committee could actually do that negotiation process with them and determine what that percentage is going to be prior to us entering into that contract. Bird: I think you're right, Ron. I also understand and in fact all three firms said that that w~s certainly negotiable, and depending on what size, how much - Nick has done so much preliminary work, that's going to help tremendously cost wise so I think we need to go in and just negotiate with them. Corrie: (Inaudible) Anderson: Probably we'll get together as a committee and select a couple of representatives. Corrie: You two and the two Councilmen would be a good committee to do the negotiations on that. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: My suggestion would be that Keith and Ron and the other two sitting out there could go and negotiate with them. Bird: That's fine with me. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, just from the Council and from the City extend appreciation to those members that are here and those members who are not here for the work they did and the hours they spent in coming up to this recommendation. I appreciate it and I think you made a very good recommendation, and I think we've got a good choice and finally we're getting somewhere. Bowers: I will pass that along to the committee and I'll get a hold of Paul first thing in the morning. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 56 Anderson: Just a comment for the other City Councilmen and the Mayor. There are some drawings out that if you haven't seen yet maybe Kenny could bring those and show them at the next Council meeting or something that Nick worked on and that probably will be the basic concept that we go off of. There maybe some slight changes from ZGA, but pretty much how the station would look from a conceptual standpoint. (I naud ible) Corrie: Thank you Kenny. Bentley: Before the commissioners leave and while we're on the subject of fire stations, I would like to see us pursue put some plans together for the Ten Mile station and maybe getting the two entities together and discussing where we could be time wise for putting together the building of the substation out there too. So sometime down the line we can schedule a meeting together and go over this. I think it's time we crank ahead. You'll have a feeling of where you are financially and we can see what we can get done with that. Because we got the same situation. Nick's got some preliminary plans for that too, so we'll see how things fit together. We can get that scheduled in the near future and have a discussion of that. Bird: Mr. Mayor, before we get off this, I would just like to state that the city don't know how much Nick has saved us in dollars for the work he has done, and I really want to commend him for the work and you know I know he's like all firemen, he gets to sleep 24 hours a day and get paid for it, but we appreciate it. Anyway thank him very much Kenny. He's really saved us a lot of money and he's done a great job. Too bad he isn't a licensed architect. We wouldn't have no problem. B. GARY SMITH: 1. DIGESTER FACILITIES AGREEMENT AMENDMENT TO EXISTING KELLER ASSOCIATES DESIGN CONTRACT: Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council members, the first item is an amendment to the contract that we presently have with Keller Associates for the design of our digester facilities upgrade. Part of their original agreement involved some preliminary investigation into converting the digesters from the mesophilic to thermophilic digestion, and what that means is that's a higher temperature digestion. John Shawcroft, superintendent, and the design engineer went back to Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin and visited a site back there that has utilized this thermophilic digestion and they concluded that yes, this was something that we needed to include in the upgrade of our digestion process, and so this amendment is to cover the engineering cost to include that phase of the upgrade into the design plan so that it can be built. And they are going to utilize as a sub-consultant the firm that is in Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin that recently completed ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 57 one of these processes, and that's part of this cost. The only problem that I had with all of this is that I'm a Green Bay Packer fan and I found out after the fact that Sturgeon Bay is about five minutes from Lambaugh Field and I didn't go. Anderson: They were in San Francisco losing. Bird: Gary this is a necessity. I mean this is something that we definitely need. Smith: Yes, sir. It's going to increase the quality of the sludge that comes out of the digestion process significantly. These things are operating at - the thermophilic digestion operates at about 120 degrees Fahrenheit. The digestion that is taking place now is in the high 90 degrees, so there's a significant increase in the heat production and the bacteria involvement in the digestion of the sludge, so we're going to get a lot better product. Anderson: Question. Does the additional heat, is that going to create more aroma around the plant? (End of Tape) ... as far as odor, odor hasn't come up. I guess that I tend to think that the odors with better digestion of the sludge we're going to get a better control on the odors than what we presently have. Along with the de-watering process that we are going to-in fact we are opening bids tomorrow or the next day on buying the centrifuge equipment for the de-watering process. So we are going to have what they call a class "A" sludge that comes out of this process. We won't have the restrictions at all that the 503 regs, I believe they are termed places on us right now with a class "8" sludge that we have to monitor so closely where the sludge goes forever, the ground testing, so forth. This class "A" sludge is-I think it is almost useable as it comes out for domestic use. Corrie: Comments or questions? Bird: I move that we enter into this amendment to the existing design contract with Keller & Associates for the sum of $18,820. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Okay, you want me to approve it, sign it? Bird: Excuse me, I forgot that. For the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Rountree: I'll second that too. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 58 Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we approve the motion by Mr. Bird and seconded by Mr. Rountree to approve the lump sum amount of $18,820 for the contract. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Smith: Second item that I have is a short form contract for the drilling of exploratory test well for Well #8. The sum of $21,511.90 for Steven and Sons Well Drilling in Boise. Corrie: Any comments or questions? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Corrie: Mr. Bird. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we enter into this contract with Steven and Son Well Drilling for Well site #8 and for the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest in the sum of $21,511.90. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Rountree to enter into the contract and mayor to sign, clerk to attest. Well site #8 by Steven and Son Well Drilling Incorporated for the amount of $21,511.90. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Smith: Third item that I have is the request to the city to enter into an engineering agreement for the design and construction monitoring for the pump and pumphouse for city Well #18, which is located on Lot 12, Block A to Summerfield Subdivision #1 and that's located near the northeast corner of the intersection of Locust Grove Road and Ustick Road. We have several years previous drilled a test well there. We have all the hydro-geologic information on that site and it's part of a small park area for the subdivision. We've also have had power installed, power transformer installed there and this is a well site for-the council declared an emergency for me so that we could get a well driller started and he will be on the site the 1 st of February to start the drilling. The civil engineer disagreement will allow the civil engineer to complete the design facilities, the design of the facilities for the pump and pumphouse. He did have a small start on this some time ago when we started out with the test well. This contract would be with civil survey consultants they have been doing our pump and pumphouse Meridian City Council January 5f 1999 Page 59 installations since Well #14. They have done a great job and they are quite reasonable in their costs and they're very responsive. So I would request that you approve of this engineering agreement with Civil Survey Consultants Incorporated of Meridian, Idaho. Mr. Mayor? Corrie: That's both a design fee and construction fee? Smith: Yes, the design service fee is shown on page 3 down at the bottom last paragraph is not to exceed the amount of $10,464.50 without prior approval of the owner and they're estimating construction services fees at approximately $7,303.50. Bird: Not to exceed again, Gary, on the $7,303.50 Smith: So far that would be a good statement, yes sir. Bird: Is that how you need in a motion, not to exceed, or just... Smith: Well... Bird: If it's not to exceed, then they can't go over it. Is there a chance they can go over it? Smith: There is if they have problems, I don't expect it that they will. In the past experience they haven't. We've stayed under their estimates so, however you want to handle that. Bird: I'll put not to exceed incase... Smith: It just depends on if they run into some problems. Anderson: You just get a change order or... Bird: Mr. Mayor I would like to make a motion that Meridian City enters into a professional service agreement with Civil Survey Consultant for Well #18, Lot 12, Block 8, Summerfield Subdivision #1. The design fee be $10,464.50 and the construction fee to be $7,303.50. The mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Bentley and motion stated by Mr. Bird. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 60 Smith: The last item that I have is the bid results for janitorial services for the city buildings. This was kind of a joint effort between the City Clerk Will Berg and myself. I put some bid documents together and Will kind of shepherded it through the bid process and gathering of information. He has thankfully put together a memorandum together, thank you will for putting together the memorandum together that kind of outlined what took place in soliciting these bids. We had five bidders. The bids ranged from a low of $1,883 per month by Enviro-clean of Meridian to $3,600 per month by Maid in the Desert. Will made some calls to and requested some references from the two low bidders the low and the second low and based on the references that were supplied he and I guess Angel made some calls to get some information, Brittney to get some information. They asked six questions, the same questions of each one of the references and you can see by the responses, particularly on Enviro-clean that they varied. Custom cleaning service for the most part had very similar comments to the questions or answers to the questions. The very last page that Will has put together in your packet shows the amount that is presently being paid by the city for services that we have by various people, companies. You can kind of compare that with what the low bid is and what the second low bid is. The other thing that isn't reflected in that last page is, I might add, that the City of Meridian right now is providing all the cleaning equipment and the cleaning materials. The paper products, soaps, so forth, so that would be in addition to that $2,716 that we are presently paying. Corrie: I think we are also we are paying a little bit of workman's camp for some of them aren't we? Bird: We better not, they are contract. Smith: Well, I'm not sure we are, probably should be, or somebody... it's not reflected in this price, no sir. Corrie: You mean in this one here? Smith: In the $2,716 is not. The bid prices that we received do reflect workman's camp. They also reflect the fact that they are supplying all the materials, they are supplying all the equipment for the cleaning process. Vacuum cleaners, dusters, rags, all the paper products, paper towels in the restrooms, cleaning solutions. Shampoo for cleaning the carpets, wax for vinyl floors and that sort of thing. That is all part of the bid. It's a package deal. The city isn't involved in it, it's just... Bird: Certificate of insurance and liability and everything? They were all capable of meeting the minimum standards? ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 61 Smith: Based on their bid, yes sir. I didn't require a bid bond on their bids, but there is a requirement for insurance, a certain level of insurance, liability insurance and also, there is a requirement that they pass a security investigation by the police department, background check, excuse me. Bird: Are these two low capable of handling this? What they've got here is not very big buildings, absolutely not very much. (Inaudible) builders don't have much more than I do. I go back to the old saying, the lowest isn't always the best. Smith: Mayor and council, I think Shari would like to make a comment too concerning Enviro-clean. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and council, the only concern that I had was that they are presently located, they are operating out of their home in Gem Park Subdivision. They have no accessory use permit, or conditional use permit. I kind of hate to see the-probably the fact that they do have the low bid is because they are not running a legitimate place of business and they are competing against people that are. Bird: That's right. Can I ask you one question, Will or anybody. What is the liability that they have to-do we require the city when we hire a subcontractor to put up the $500,000 liability bond which we've changed in that ordinance? Any subcontractor working for us should have that, right? Gigray: I don't know that we have a policy in place to deal with that in terms of minimum requirements. We could research to see whether you have such a one in place. I'm not aware that you do. Now, you may have a practice of making that requirement and you can make it a specific practice by making it a bid requirement when you send out the invitation for bids, which is what I believe is what Gary has done. Bird: What did you put on there? Smith: The-as far as insurance requirements are concerned, their workman's compensation was required by the state statutory limits for the state. The employers liability was statutory. Comprehensive General Liability bodily injury $500,000 each occurrence and annual (Inaudible) , property damage $500,000 each occurrence and annual (Inaudible) and personal injury $500,000 annual (Inaudible). Bird: That's our general. That's okay now, can they meet these? Smith: Well, they have to provide that certificate of insurance before the notice to proceed is issued. ( ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 62 Bird: Well yeah, I realize that, but has anybody checked to see if these two low bidders are capable of-that one is working out of their house, I would really question if they can come up with $500,000 liability. Smith: As part of the bid process, we never ask for (Inaudible) until we give them notice of the award and then they have a certain time in order to come back with the requirements, sign the contract, provide the certificate of insurance. Bird: I'm familiar with one of them real well, they were used a lot on big commercial jobs, they do a lot of clearing. They are next to high, I guarantee you that they are a legitimate business and will be there everyday and have got the people to do it. I love saving $1,000, but if we give a contract, we get half service in the first place before I give out the results and ask them if they are capable. You are entitled to do that. Say hey, I want to see your certificate of insurance, who is your policy holder and I want to see your workman's comp thing. I have a feeling that you are going to be surprised... Corrie: I would recommend to the council that they be very cautious about Enviro- clean. If they are not even up to standards as far as (Inaudible) are concerned, we are contributing to the delinquency of the cleaning company. Bentley: My preference would be to go with Western Building. Corrie: Don't have to go with the low bidder. Bentley: I know, and we are sitting virtually at what we are paying now, but we are paying for all the equipment and all the supplies. So we still would be saving money with them. Bird: Can't do that. You can't take-we have to disqualify (Inaudible) before we can do that. Gigray: Well this is a bid for services, not for equipment. Corrie: So you are not under statute. Bird: You don't have to take the low bidder? Gigray: No, it's a matter of-it would just be if somebody wanted to raise the issue politically. That's-you have to decide this is in the best interest of the city for whatever reason. ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 63 Smith: Well when the city clerk calls the bidders and informs them who the bid was awarded to, they are going to ask why and in all fairness we need to have some kind of response to the people that did submit a bid as to why... Bird: Was this publicly open? Smith: Yes. There was... Bird: Does everybody know what they bid? Smith: There was one person at the bid opening and he was next to high, Mr. Harris, he was in the middle wasn't he? Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the council, if the issue over the compliance of Enviro-if they-according to your records and that office that they are showing, they're not in compliance with city ordinance, you could say that you request verification as to whether they are or not, prior to whatever time and then could continue this to determine when do you have to make (Inaudible). Smith: Sixty days from the day of the bid opening. We have 60 days to make the award. The bid was open December 22nd. Gigray: If you have a known commodity, if the council feels they have someone that they know does a good job based on experience-I suppose that is a good answer to that one. Berg: Mr. Mayor, members of the council, as usual with my experience of bids, either you have lots of them and you have problems, or you don't have any of them and you don't have any problems. This janitorial service, the more we dealt into it, the more uneasy it gets to be to figure out quality of service versus price. You can't say absolutely that this person is not going to give you the quality of service with the lowest price, but you have this thing in the back of your mind that I don't think we were paying outlandish prices for janitorial services, but if you compound the cost of the service by adding supplies and equipment and they're still almost half of what you are paying now, it seems to make you wonder if someone didn't read the bid package, or are you missing something from the whole picture. So, I've talked to Gary quite a bit, since this isn't my expertise for janitorial service, if there are some other things that we can do, ask more questions, give more references, but I feel we have to justify to whoever we don't give the bid to why. We had Shari drive by and look at the residence, of course it's a residence, but we don't know if it's like some of the ,businesses that they operate their billing and telephone service out of their house, and they actually do their work out of a storage unit, or somebody else's business. So there are a lot of assumptions that I don't want to get saying that well, we think this or we think that, if you want us to Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 64 investigate further, we will, but we are on some kind of a tight deadline trying to get this resolved in January. I know several of departments would like to have janitorial servicesa Rountree: It seems to me that there is some question as to the ability for Enviroclean to give us the level of service that we would expect, and I think on that basis we could reject it just on the information we received from the interviews, it seems to be clear that they don't do a particularly good job for any of their clients. Not to mention how they may reside and work out of their home in Meridian. I heard what Mr. Bird said about Custom Cleaning Services, that their accounts don't look particularly big, but they seem satisfied. In fact, it's not often that you get better than average janitorial service from the ones that I've been involved with. It's usually a continual battle. I don't see any reason why we would reject them. It seems to me that they've put together a professional proposal. They've got some professional accounts, their accounts seem satisfied. Granted Western Buildings could do it, but they are big and they've had an opportunity to get big because of accounts like ours. I would say that we look at Custom Cleaning Services, give them an opportunity to perform, if they don't perform, let's have an out clause that is very clear on our contract with them that due to nonperformance or dissatisfaction they are out within however many days we can work in the contract. Whatever they are willing to sign and deal with the next highest bidder. I've got to think if they are willing to please the customers that we've contacted, they are going to be willing to please us. (I naud ible) Bird: Who are you giving that to Charlie? (I naud ible) Rountree: Custom Cleaning Servicea Bird: Oh, the next one up the 2100? Bentley: They still have to go through the scrutiny of the police department anyway. Bird: They also have to get their proof of liability in. Rountree: They have to meet all the terms and conditions that they were presented, if they can't... Bird: Is that a motion Charlie? Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 65 Rountree: I would move that we proceed and enter into an agreement for janitorial services with Custom Cleaning Services authorize the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, seconded by Mr. Bird to (Inaudible) the requirements that Mr. Rountree stated in the Custom Cleaning Services be awarded the contract based upon the conditions. Any further comments or discussion? Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Just a point of information, I don't know what the bid specs required, but it would seem to me to be advisable that the city have an option to provide notice of termination of the contract without cause. When you get into cause in the government area, raises some issues. If they would allow us to do that, I think that's the best way. If you don't like it, just give them the notice it's going to take awhile to transfer to somebody else anyway. Rountree: Right, that's a good point. Smith: Item #10 in the agreement is-it deals with termination and it says this agreement may be terminated immediately by owner by for breach of this agreement by janitor and either party may terminate this agreement by 30 days written notice of termination to the other party. Bird: That takes care of it. Corrie: They understand they have to go through the police? Smith: Yes sir, that was part of the specifications. Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: So you will do that Mr. Berg, give you that leeway there Gary. Smith: I would just to say one more thing, I wish each and everyone of you a happy new year and all the best for this coming year. I think it's going to be very busy again. We haven't had any winter yet, no one has slowed down, it's still going great guns. Thanks a lot for your support. Corrie: I believe I didn't see approval of response letter to Bureau of Reclamation Mr. Bill Gigray. ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 66 Gigray: Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I have prepared here which is an inner office memorandum which I circulated to Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, and Tom Kuntz for their comment about proposal for the res~onse to the letter that was sent by the department of interior dated December 4 h l 1998 concerning their proposal to transfer their interest in certain property to the Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District. I have attached to the material that I've just handed to you a copy of the letter that was sent by the department of interior and of course in this instance, we would propose that the letter be addressed to the Mr. Steve Dunn at the Bureau as is requested on the last page of the letter from the Bureau and this proposal would propose that the mayor would sign this letter as an official response on behalf of the city. As I understand it and Gary, Shari and Tom can correct me if I'm wrong they have basically approved the form of this particular letter. What this letter proposes to do is first set out that it's official response. It's been authorized by the council. Secondly, is to address the interest of the city in this matter as to why it is responding. It tries to make a strong statement of the fact that the providing park and recreational amenities throughout the city for it's residences and important goal of the city and I'm summarizing this, that it is growing at unprecedented rates and basically the need for this type of development is increasing and in this instance, we have a situation where the juxtaposition of the various canals and laterals and drains throughout the city and the planning jurisdiction is quite extensive and of course a quicker view of the map would clearly establish that. Then we try to set out in this proposal of what the city's concern is, understanding that we want to be delicate in the way that it's presented. First is that the-our first interest of course and concern is to maintain our ability to maximize what we have already established as the city's interest and then the history and experience of the city officials was what I have heard over the months that I have been here and dealing with department heads and yourselves with regards to the concern about what the bureaus proposal is. That is and I've worded this, it is the perception of this city that the Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District finds that development of pedestrian pathways and parkway uses is not in it's best interest. So we are not saying well they're this or that, it's our perception based on their history and that they've shown some flexibility with regards to existing parkways along drainage ways and then stating that the city appreciate and anticipates that they will continue with that flexibility but they have not shown flexibility on canals and laterals and the city anticipates that position will continue and that in the event this action is forth coming they may become even less flexible. So the third part of the letter is a request that the department consider transferring it's interest to the city on the condition that the city would continue to pursue the designation of these areas as part of it's park and recreational system and that at such time as it would determine that an area is totally unsuitable for that development the city would then transfer or assign it's interest to the Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District and then an alternate part of the request would be a minimum as an alternative that the bureau transfer their interest to the district, that-upon the condition that the district in good faith would negotiate with the City of Meridian for an appropriate license Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 67 agreement and I say similar in format to existing license agreement, we've just about got that concluded. I have received (Inaudible) revisions who included a lot of the requests that we had made of them as a result of our meeting. I have sent back my response to that which was a couple more requests, I haven't heard back from him since my last letter. Then saying that's only a back up position of the city. So this was sent out as a proposal. We do have to respond by the 15th. I can advise you that the facts which is the foundation for Ada County Trail Systems which is really the reinstated article and name of the former Boise River Foundation which has to do with the development of the Boise River. Green Belt is definitely in support of this position and their board has asked if the city responds, could they have a copy of the letter and I said if the City Council would grant that permission I would share a draft that the city would respond with their people. Also, it's my understanding in talking to Judy Peavey-Derr that Ada Planning is in very supportive of what I would anticipate the city's position is. I've talked to Norm Holme who is the Planning and Zoning Director of the City of Nampa, knowing that Larry Bledsoe was now gone, I was concerned that their might be a lack of communication in Nampa about this very issue and alerted him that they needed to respond as well and I would hope that we might get permission to share what the city's response is with Nampa so that they might respond as well. So anyway, this was the kick off of proposed response for your consideration. Bentley: Further more with that, APA discussed this briefly at the last meeting, last month and all the cities that were there from Ada County, representing Ada County and they are all against this also. Nampa and Caldwell were in attendance also. It is going to be further discussion in the January meeting and I really look for some resolution to come out of them in support of either giving it to the city or to the counties and keeping it away from Nampa/Meridian. Gigray: I was advised that I think Commissioner Bisterieldt was particularly at one meeting I know that Judy Peavey-Derr attended was pretty adamant about not wanting this to happen so there could be numerous (Inaudible). Rountree: A couple of comments. I think the basic letter is well founded and good. There is a couple of areas that I think we might want to address in the first interest of the city. Not only are we looking at pedestrian ways and recreational amenities but I think we are also looking at aesthetic amenities in some neighborhoods and we have some real eye sores out there because of poor care and maintenance and lack of cooperation on the part of Nampa/Meridian Irrigation District to do things. So I think we need to address those aspects even when they are not suitable for parkways and that sort of thing, they have to be incorporated in the context of our community not just these open areas or these areas of noxious weeds and blight. So we need to address that as one of our issues. f { i, { Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 68 Gigray: Could I have a question, because that's a real good point. Would we be in a position to say that we would take over that or we would be in a position to care for that, would that be part of our parks and rec area? I'm just trying to figure out how to fit it in here, because that's how I've kind of posed this. Rountree: That is something that the council would certainly have to consider, but I would think that our first choice would be to work cooperatively with the neighborhoods, the subdivisions to see if we couldn't work something out with the neighborhood associations and our developers, but at last resort, if it fit well with our pedestrian ways and park systems, yeah we probably ought to. Get some of these areas cleaned up, like the stretch of the canal there off of Cherry Lane between the Christian Church and the Vineyards coming out of the high school, it's never going to look any better than it does now, and it's an eyesore to stop and look at it. There's things like that out south that are going on with open fences and weeds on one side and yards on the other. I would hope that we would commit if we could get control of those rights-of-way that we would look towards improving them, even if we did nothing, they probably wouldn't get any worse. If we did nothing more than mow the weeds and gather up the... Gigray: Static's and just general maintenance, weed control. Rountree: Weed control, trash removal. Then on the second page under the third, the city request, the second paragraph B, at a minimum alternative transfer to the bureaus interest. I think that is too wishy-washy in terms of us being able to control our destiny there. I think if it goes to Nampa/Meridian, it should go to Nampa/Meridian only upon, in our case, our community and Nampa/Meridian executing a memorandum of agreement or understanding or some kind of binding document that outlines the use, the care and the maintenance of those corridors within the city limits, in the city-or within the area of impact in the City of Meridian. Only until that's satisfactory or that's executed to the satisfaction of both parties would that transfer take place. Otherwise we want it. Gigray: I throw it out as an option. I thought you may want to say I don't want to do that at all and strike it out. I though it would be easier to through out some options. Rountree: I don't have a problem with them having it as long as they understand that we're going to be a player. Not a sit back one. Other than that, I think it's pretty sound. What you might want to do-get a hold of Jim and bounce it off of him. I'll get you his number if you don't have it. I think you've got his card. Gigray: I have that note. Rountree: Call him up, he said he would be more than willing to give us an editorial. There is a key point that you'll kick them over you'll probably have it then. <' Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 69 Bentley: I agree. Corrie: We need a motion to authorize to have the letter signed and... Rountree: I make a motion that Meridian City Council and mayor authorize the further editorial of the letter to the Bureau of Reclamation dated in response to their letter dated 12/17/98. Continue drafting be done by the city attorney and provide final document for sig natu re by... Bentley: Response has to be in by the 15th. Rountree: January 11, 1999, for circulation and signature. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree and seconded by Mr. Bentley to approve the motion as stated. All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All aye. Corrie: Request for Darlene Stutzman regarding vacation of public right-af-way. That was denied once and needs to reapply I think. Shari do you want-Will go ahead and give your speech. Berg: I guess I had the privilege of being contacted by Darlene, which ever she goes by, as I know her as Ms. Stutzman and she said she needed to make a requirement from ACHD for this application. This was during the time that Shari was on her vacation and so I told her she needed to submit a letter to the City Council to get this on the agenda and I think Shari has further comments to the in-depth of the previous stories behind this situation. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and council, Ms. Stutzman did come in previously and request a vacation of the right-af-way at that time it was denied by council. As part of the Sterling Creek Subdivision staff had requested that they make that a pedestrian walkway, however, that requirement was removed by council, but it is a petfect walkway over to Five Mile Creek, although they did have access to Five Mile Creek in other areas. There currently exists an old railroad car, what is that, some kind of railroad car or something, it's there to stay I think. People use it now as a walkway. Washington would align almost perfectly with that existing bridge over the Five Mile Creek. Then across the Five Mile Creek is-it's not called a pedestrian walkway, it's a drainage lot that goes to Danbury's Subdivision, but there is access through two Danbury Subdivision in that area and the people in Danbury Fair have expressed concern that that be maintained as a pathway. I assured them that if the vacation was considered in Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 70 the future there would be another application and they would get the opportunity to testify at the public hearing. That's what she needs to do, she is going through the Ada County Highway District process apparently, I guess it's already been denied once, she would just have to start over as far as... Gigray: .1 represent a highway district, so I'm somewhat familiar with street vacations and issues regarding cities. I know that you have a county wide highway district over here. When I saw this, it posed an-it's the first one of these that I've seen but I do think one of the issues here that we may want to think about is how we process any kind of application for street vacations. Ada County Highway District is the one that has jurisdictional authority to do it, but they can't do it without the approval of the city. In my view the best policy on these would be that the city not entertain such action unless they file the petition with the Ada County Highway District, they've noticed all of the hearings, then we could hear it as part of that process and make our comments and decision as part of a filed petition. My concern would be that someone files a petition, you take an action, say yeah, we approve this, if you do, for how long? What's it subject to? What are the conditions? Where is the staff reports? It seems to me if they file a legitimate petition to vacate a property then there is some legal process in place and then we could deal with that as an (Inaudible). As I saw this, it didn't look like-has she applied? Stiles: Previously she had. Gigray: It's been denied? Stiles: Yes. Gigray: I think... Rountree: That's the way the record sits at this point. So until she goes back through ACHD we are done with her. Gigray: Yeah, because I think otherwise you would be entertaining these things all the time. They would come in here and want to get a read from you-will you approve this, then I'll go over to ACHD to make my petition. I think that is where they ought to go and then you can take a look at, get the staff reports that you need and then take action on whether you would approve it or not. Corrie: Send her back. Okay, anyone want to handle these two resolutions tonight? Bird: Which ones? Corrie: Resolution 172 and 208 changing the-well, let's we've got one for empowering the city treasurer to make investments. That's superceding resolution 208. We have in Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 71 your packet this supercedes and gives the chance that the states that the city treasurer is (Inaudible) invest Idaho funds and then the committee is set up. If they want to hear it it's not on the council agenda, but go ahead. We need to get this going. Gigray: Since the action taken on December 15th and the resolution that was passed, on that data I've met with Dean Buffington and Kari McNeal of that firm. Their concern was as the resolution was previously passed, it provided that we would establish an account with Buffington and Moore and they were also a little concerned with whether or not a committee that had a condition that there be an actual signing by one other member might require meeting and a process problem in terms of what their needs are with regards to how the investment process would actually work in the field. So in response to that comment I have submitted for your consideration a resolution which would supercede the original one, so that the original one would stay in place and then this would just take over at some point as you might pass it... (END OF TAPE) Gigray: What it does is it in terms of the language of this particular resolution provides that in part four here that the city treasurer is hereby authorized and directed and empowered to seek investment advise from Buffington, Moore, McNeal and so on in accordance with their proposal to the city rather than establish an account there and assign all necessary documents together the clerk to carry out the directive and empowerment and then in part three the city treasurer is hereby directed and empowered by this resolution to invest such idle funds of the city as reasonable upon the advice and approval of the investment committee which advice and approval may occur at such times as provides efficiency and decision making and the management of investment accounts. The idea was to try and make this so it could work in the field. The committee could do the job that you ask it to do and of course the state law requires the empowerment be to the city treasurer. As this was done before it required the signing and you could still have the clerk attest or you could have a committee member do that, but the-anyway, I've submitted this, Dean Buffington has commented that this is fine. It's slightly different than what you did before. (Inaudible) Bird: I move that we, what are we going to number the resolution number? Rountree: As a new one, 208. Bird: This is going to be 208 again? Rountree: 208A. r. \ Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 72 Gigray: Whatever your next number is, 209. Bird: I move that we accept the past resolution 209. The suspension of rules? (Inaudible) Unknown: Don't have to worry about that. Bird: For the mayor to sign and the clerk to attest. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Rountree that resolution 209 be approved and mayor to sign and city clerk to attest. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Thank you we got that one. Do you want to do the other resolution, amending resolution 172, there was just some lines taken out. Bird: This is on that time and a half? Corrie: Yeah. Just changing the date August 26th to September 26th, 1998. Is that correct Mr. Gigray that is all that was changed on that? Gigray: It was just a house keeping matter and I think I did a little memo that you have with it just saying that I under the open meeting law I think you can do this, I believe the mayor and the clerk have exercised good faith in putting all matters on the agenda and you can add (Inaudible). Rountree: Just a question, what's the difference between August and September? Gigray: This was advice that I received from the clerks office that this needed to be changed and I think this has to do with when this would take effect and that it needed to take effect in September, not in August. Bird: Was it because the fiscal year ending or what? Rountree: It doesn't end in September. Bird: That's what I was going to say. September 26th would be the... ( ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 73 Gigray: Maybe the best thing to do would be to table this till next meeting and we can clarify what the origins of this request were. I did receive a request (Inaudible). Anderson: Don't have to table it because it isn't on the agenda. Bird: No. Corrie: I'll bring it off and put it on the agenda next time. I'll even find out... Smith: Mr. Mayor, I think that date came about during the length of time that the discussions were going on concerning the administrative leave time that the exempt employees had accumulated. Bentley: Well lets work it out and do it next time. Bird: We'll get it next time. Corrie: I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. One thing, Gary on your transportation taskforce the speed limits have already been changed on Meridian Road. Smith: Good. Bird: Mr. Mayor, we as a council has got one thing to do here. This is the first meeting of January and we need to elect our new council president and vice president. So if you will entertain a motion, I make a motion to nominate somebody. Corrie: Are you all ready for it? Bird: I'm ready, are you ready Ron, you ready Charlie? Rountree: It's still today. Bird: I move that we-I nominate Charles Rountree as council president. Bentley: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Bentley to nominate Mr. Charlie Rountree as continuous president of the council for the year 1999. Any further comments? Rountree: I guess the only comment that I would have before you cast your ballot, in the way of discussion, if that's the case, there may be some assignment changes. Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 74 Bird: Whatever you want to do, that's your baby. Rountree: Okay. Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bird: Mr. Mayor, I nominate Glen Bentley as Vice President of the Meridian City Council. Rountree: Second. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird, seconded by Mr. Charlie Rountree that Mr. Glen Bentley be nominated as Vice President of the council. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Corrie: Now I'll entertain a motion... Rountree: I just have-it's really not an item, but the planning session for the end of the month, everybody up for that? Corrie: I won't be here, but... Rountree: Two things that I've got is we want a session with Mr. Gigray about where we are going with process and procedure and we'll get with-get you more specifics. We also want an affidavit from you that we will get this stuff sooner for council meetings. If he wants to meet with us or talk about the things that they want to do in the way of trash pick up, recycle, programs that they think they would like to offer the City of Meridian, those are the only two things that I have at this point for that meeting. Give me your thoughts and ideas for that and we'll schedule it for the last week in January. Bird: Are you going to do it the 26th Charlie? Rountree: We would normally do it the 26th, yeah. With that I'll move to adjourn. Corrie: Also I need to talk to you about (Inaudible) we can talk about that later. Bird: Second. Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we adjourn all in favor say aye. ( Meridian City Council January 5, 1999 Page 75 MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 :53 (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) r/). ,- \, ~ WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.,