HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 09-01
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 1998 - 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 SPECIAL MEETING HELD AUGUST 6, 1998: (APPROVE)
B. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS REGULAR MEETING HELD AUGUST 18, 1998:
(APPROVE)
C. MINUTES FROM SPECIAL MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1998: (APPROVE)
D. LAND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH L. J. RANCHES: (APPROVE RESOLUTION
#170)
E. MEMO REGARDING COMPENSATORY TIME: (TABLE UNTIL SEPTEMBER
15, 1998)
F. MEMO REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE TIME: (TABLE UNTIL SEPTEMBER
15, 1998)
G. REQUEST TO HOOK UP TO CITY WATER BY WHEEL CITY, INC.: (DENY
REQUEST)
H. APPROVE BILLS: (APPROVE)
REGULAR AGENDA
1. TABLED AUGUST 4, 1998: ORDINANCE # - ORDINANCE CHANGES
WITH CROSS CONNECTION AND BACKFLOW DEVICES: (1 ABLE
INDEFINITEL Y)
2. TABLED AUGUST 18, 1998: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 4.13 ACR~S BY
EAGLE PARTNERS - NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAGLE ROAD AND MAGIC
VIEW: (1 ABLE UNTIL SEPTEMBER 15, 1998)
3. ORDINANCE #800 - CITY OF MERIDIAN I IDAHO POWER FRANCHISE (2ND
READING): (2ND READING BY TITLE/SUMMARY)
4~ ORDINANCE #801 - THOUSAND SPRINGS/FARWEST ANNEXATION AND
ZONING: (TABLE UNTIL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED)
5. TABLED AUGUST 18, 1998: AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH OF 1 ,000 FEET FOR FOUR BLOCKS AND
PIPING OF THE RIDENBAUGH CANAL BY FARWEST DEVELOPERS -
NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE: (APPROVE FFCL AND
APPROVE DECISION)
6. TABLED AUGUST 18,1998: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
PROPOSED THOUSAND SPRINGS SUBDIVISION BY FARWEST
DEVELOPERS AND MARTY GOLDSMITH - NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST
OF EAGLE ROAD: (APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS)
7. TABLED AUGUST 18, 1998: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A CONTRACTORS' YARD BY DONOVAN HANSON d/b/a HANSON
EXCAVATING - LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF PLAYGROUND SUBDIVISION:
(APPROVE FFCL AND APPROVE DECISION)
8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
VAR1ANCE FOR OFF-PREMISE SIGN AT S. PROGRESS AVENUE 11-84 BY
R.T. NAHAS COMPANY -INTERSTATE 84 AND EAST 1ST STREET:
(APPROVE FFCL AND APPROVE DECISION)
9. FINAL PLAT FOR HAVEN COVE NO.8 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY - SOUTH OF W. CHERRY LANE AND EAST OF TEN MILE ROAD:
(APPROVE)
10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MAWS
SUBDIVISION NO. 3 BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - NORTH OF EAST
PINE AND WEST OF NORTH LOCUST GROVE ROAD: (APPROVE FFCL AND
DENY REQUEST)
11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR BRIGHT BEGINNINGS LEARNING CENTER TO LAURIE M.
ROY BY LAURIE M. ROY - 510 E WATER TOWER LANE: (APPROVE)
12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR AN APPROVED SIGN
ADVERTISING BUSINESS ON PART OF LOT 3 BY AV II LLC - 1650 E
FAIRVIEW AVE: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
i'
(
(
13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR TILING OF IRRIGATION
DITCHES CROSSING THE SITE BY R.C. WILLEY HOME FURNISHING - NE
CORNER EAGLE AND FRANKLIN ROADS: (APPROVE)
14. DISCUSSION WITH WALT MORROW REGARDING BSU CONTRACT WITH
CITY ATWATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING. (ATTORNEY TO REVIEW)
15. DISCUSSION WITH WALT MORROW REGARDING GENERATIONS PLAZA
BID REPORT. (PRESENTATION OF COMMITTEE'S VIEWS)
16. WATER I SEWER I TRASH DELINQUENCIES: (APPROVE)
17. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
GARY SMITH:
GENERATIONS PLAZA BID RESULTS. (REJECT BIDS)
(
{
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:35 p.m. on
September 1, 1998 by Mayor Robert D. Corrie.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree.
OTHERS PRESENT: Bob Corrie, Will Berg, Bill Gigray, Bill Gordon, Shari Stiles, Gary
Smith, Brad Watson, Keith Borup.
Corrie: Council, you have the consent agenda A-H. Is there any items that you would
like to pull off and discuss later?
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we pull off item D, E, F and G.
Corrie: Okay, do I have a second on that?
Rountree: I'll second that.
Corrie: Motion made and second that we pull off item D, E, F and G for later discussion.
All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: We have therefore items A, B, C, and H on the consent agenda.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the remaining items on the consent
agenda, items A, 8, C and H.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second that we approve the consent agenda less 0, E, F and
G. Any further discussions? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: I'd like to welcome everyone here this evening. Also you notice that we have
also a new attorney representing the city. It's Bill Gigray. His firm there's nine of them
in the Meridian area here and they will be with us for the city council meetings and also
the Planning and Zoning as well.
Gigray: Thank you.
Corrie: Council with your approval I would like to ask that we move item 14 to item 1 as
we do have a gentleman that needs to be at another meeting I think so with your
approval I would like to have that one put as number one.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 2
Rountree: Mr. Mayor after some two years with this item it's my pleasure to make a
motion to bring item 14 to number one on our agenda this evening.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second we bring item 14 to item number one. Is there any
further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO. 14: DISCUSSION WITH WALT MORROW REGARDING BSU CONTRACT
WITH CITY ATWATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I'll take a few minutes and roughly brief the council. Councilman
Rountree is correct. It's been over two years that this project has been in the works. It
started underneath former Mayor Kingsford's administration, been continued by your
administration, past and present councils. As a point of review the city needed a place
for it's water department to be. Boise State's programs at what had been our old sewer
plant had kind of fallen on hard times. We had a provision in the contract that allowed
for us to have the building back. Rather than pursue an adversial relationship, the city
of Meridian joined with Boise State and Dennis Griffin to bring forward a proposal
whereby the water department would move to the administration building at the end of
8th Street, and at the same time what we would do is that we would allow the power line
man school to stay functioning. Should at such time there became a water program or
water certification program we would lend our facility to that program. The same thing
was true with the sewer plant. Idaho is the only state in the 50 states that does not
require certification as sewer operators. We believe that will change in the not too
distant future. We built as you remember Mr. Mayor the administration at the sewer
plant building to encompass classroom space so that we could joint venture with Boise
State University, a facility whereby we could offer that type of training here in our
community, have a joint partnership between us and Boise State that was beneficial to
us as a city and to Boise State as a university. We have accomplished all those things
finally in terms of the physical plans. We now present to you the contract for that.
Dennis will be making a short presentation about the west campus of Boise State
University. Mayor Corrie and myself represent you and the citizens of Meridian on that
committee that is guiding the future of that facility. So it takes me great pleasure to
present to you Dr. Dennis Griffin, the head of the west Boise State University campus.
Griffin: Thanks Walt. Mr. Mayor and members of the Meridian City Council, it is a
pleasure to be here. I'll keep my remarks brief. I want to thank you for the chance to
further our great relationship with the City of Meridian. Boise State University has had
three different operations running right here in the city over a number of years. We've
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 3
had the professional truck driving program down on Broadway. We had the waste
water program out on 8th the sewer plant we're talking about. We've had an electrical
line worker program offering at the same location. So there's been many years of joint
cooperative arrangement and we've always enjoyed that very much. The relationship
by the way between the Meridian area and Boise State University is on going as was
just mentioned by Walt. We have formed a 40 member advisory group. Folks from
Meridian through Caldwell to help us plan this new branch campus. Boise State west or
whatever we're going to call it. I'm not sure what we're going to call it just yet. Several
members of this city are on that committee. The Mayor is as was mentioned, so is Walt,
so is Dave Bivens, Ron Van Auker, Larry Chetwood and there's a number of folks who
represent this area. We wanted pretty much to involve the City of Meridian in that
planning, because we see that as a very important part of what's going on. It will be a
campus to help the people on this end of the valley. In terms of new campus, I might
just give you a little run down so you reference of the future. This new campus will be
community driven. This 40 member advisory group will help us decide what will be
offered at the campus. It's going to be a full service branch. Upper division courses,
graduate level course, but the focus will be a community college kind of thing. If you've
been to Oregon, Washington or California you know the thing that sort of drives the
economy of most of those cities is it's strong community college. That's what this will be
all within the perimeters of Boise State. To give you some sample of what that means a
community college has four basic components. It has an academic component, which
focuses on the first two years primarily of academics. It has a vocational technical
component. It has an outreach component which means we offer lots of short term job
related non credit type classes, and a strong adult basic ad. Program. So those are the
four legged stool so to speak of a community college. We have that running right now.
We're going to expand that dramatically in the new campus. Progress to date, we've
purchased 150 acres. It lies just exactly five miles from this building that direction, so
the availability for the folks in this area for schooling is going to be really great. No
parking problems, we'll have plenty of parking. So this whole thing of going downtown
to Boise State from now on for folks in this end of the valley won't have to happen. It
doesn't have to happen now because even where we're at now in the center with the
new campus it would really be enhanced considerably. We have a master plan
approved for the campus, been approved by the state board. We have received $2
million this last session to do infrastructure and planning for the new campus and so the
plans we have now are to have a building or two up and going by 2002. So that's where
we're going with this thing. We just see again that it's so important that members of
Meridian, Nampa, Caldwell and the smaller communities in this whole area understand
that this will be a community college serving the entire valley so that's what we're
gearing toward and we've enjoyed the relationship with Meridian very much and we look
forward to that in the future. I'd like to present to you a contract. You may have already
received this, but here's the original basically and the first $20 for the first which Walt
and I are going to share. You'll notice on there it's a dollar year proposed for use of a
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 4
piece of your water - our old waste water plant, your water plant down here for the first
year. So we certainly appreciate your consideration. Thank you very much.
Corrie: Any questions of Dennis?
Bird: I have none.
Bentley: None.
Rountree: None. Mr. Mayor I'd just like to take a moment to thank ex-councilman
Morrow and Dennis both for working this out and the Mayor as well to get this finally
done.
Morrow: Well thank you. It was a great task and we'll have some great results I think.
Corrie: Council would you like to have this contract reviewed by our counsel and then
brought on the 15th since our counsel hasn't seen this yet.
Rountree: That would be correct. Mr. Mayor I move that we submit this proposed
agreement with Boise State University to our counsel for review and recommendation
for consideration by council on our next regularly scheduled meeting September 15th.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second that we bring this back on September 15th meeting.
Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.1: ORDINANCE #_ - ORDINANCE CHANGES WITH CROSS
CONNECTION AND BACKFLOW DEVICES.
Corrie: Council we've been requested by the city engineer that they would like to have
a little more study on this since there's a lot of complications in this matter. They would
like to if we woutd just table it to an unspecific date and bring it back off the table
whenever we're ready for that. So council your pleasure on that?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we table item number one until such time as the city
water department is ready to present the proposed ordinance to us.
Bird: Second.
(
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 5
Corrie: Motion made and second that we table the item number one until council brings
it back off the table. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 4.13 ACRES BY EAGLE PARTNERS-
NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAGLE ROAD AND MAGIC VIEW:
Corrie: This was also - Counselor, do you want to explain this?
Gigray: Certainly. Mr. Mayor and members of the council, we have made a request
that this matter be continued and set for time certain on September 15th. We're in the
process of drafting as was requested by city council action on the 18th of August the
proposed Findings and Conclusions of Law and order and decision. As you well know
this involves a record that is extensive. It involves numerous issues. It's a matter which
we want to carefully draft these Findings in light of the record produced for your
consideration. As you well know, there have been some changes in the city attorney's
office. In the interim I am assuming the full responsibility for preparing these for your
consideration and request to have until the 15th. I would advise that the applicant has
been advised that this request would be made and is fully informed of the situation, and
I fully anticipate that we should have no problem presenting these for your consideration
on the 15th.
Rountree: That would be for the Findings and the Development Agreement and the
ordinance?
Gigray: We've been in ongoing discussions and I assume and it's my understanding
that our charge is to present to you all of that information so that you can make the
determination that you wish to make regarding that whole matter.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we table the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for
Eagle Partners until September 15th.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird that we table the request
number 2 until September 15th, 1998. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those
in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.3: ORDINANCE #800 - CITY OF MERIDIAN I IDAHO POWER FRANCHISE.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 6
Corrie: This is the second reading on this and I'll read it by title only as the second
reading. MAYOR CORRIE READ ORDINANCE #800 TITLE. That will be the second
reading of Ordinance #800.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I have a question for counsel. We have your memo stating of the
thirty day issue. We had the first reading on the 18th. Today is the second reading.
The third reading will be the 15th. So we cannot act on this until after the 18th?
Gigray: The pass is the ordinance has to be more than 30 days from the date of it's
introduction. And then of course we'll want to make sure and we should have proof
before the council that it was in fact published at some point in time prior to final
passage. So you may want to have that on another day for that third reading.
Bird: Does it have to be at a regular council meeting?
Gigray: You could have a special meeting or you could have a third reading on that and
still delay passage until the following meeting in order to meet the statute. However you
want to do it.
Bird: So if we read it Counselor the 15th, then didn't pass it until the 6th of October we
would be all right.
Gigray: Sure. The only question there is when it becomes operative and whether or not
that posing any problems in terms of what you anticipate it might generate. But you can
certainly do that. I just want to make sure because this is a franchise ordinance that
you are aware of that procedure so that we follow it.
Bentley: Right. I appreciate that, but we could also have a special meeting at the
beginning of our workshop instead of setting up another meeting.
Corrie: It would be thirty days, yes. We can do that.
Bentley: It would the 22nd or the 29th whatever you choose. It couldn't be any sooner
than the 18th.
Rountree: It could be either the 2200 or the 29th.
Bentley: Okay, thank you.
ITEM NO.4: ORDINANCE #801 - THOUSAND SPRINGS I FARWEST ANNEXATION
AND ZONING.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 7
Corrie: Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have Ordinance #801 read
in its entirety? Hearing none, council how do you wish to handle Ordinance #801?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, questions of staff. Have they reviewed and in concurrence with
the terms in this ordinance?
Stiles: Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council I was just wondering if there were -
there needed to be mentioned in here, I haven't read the Ordinance, but I see a mention
of the requirement for a Development Agreement as part of the annexation. Does that
need to be included?
Rountree: I don't see it in here. Gary do you have any comments?
Smith: No, I don't.
Rountree: I have a question for Ms. Bowcutt. Was it your understand that a
Development Agreement would be part of this annexation?
Bowcutt: (inaudible)
Corrie: Counsel is it required to have the Development Agreement in the ordinance as
such?
Gigray: Mr. Mayor let me first comment, I think Mr. Prior drafted this ordinance. We've
worked with him on the form on annexation ordinances which is used here and as far as
the form is concerned in the process that has to be followed in annexation. I think it
follows that appropriately. I feel at a loss to comment on a specific Development
Agreement in this instance because I haven't been involved in that and I don't know
what the terms and conditions are associated with this annexation. I feel that I mean
sometimes as I understand it you require them to enter into a Development Agreement,
which would be then recorded prior to annexation so that that agreement is in placed
and already signed and then you can do the annexation and I don't think the annexation
ordinance should refer to the development agreement because it's going to refer to itself
and it's already going to be signed and recorded. Now whether that's happened in this
instance or not, I don't know. And if it has not you may to defer action on the
annexation to ensure that that has taken place prior to annexation or we would have to
redraft the ordinance to provide an additional section in it. The problem that I see with
Development Agreements being referenced in annexation ordinances, you don't want to
have a condition in an ordinance that might make it inoperative. In other words it's
either ready to annexed or it's not, and I just can't comment on whether that
development agreement has signed and recorded, and the problem you get when you
pass these is that you have to publish them within the specified time and of course the
city engineer and the city clerk have to start filing those documents within the ten day
(-
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 8
period or you don't affect an annexation. So that all gets on auto pilot at that point and if
you have a problem because of the development agreement has not been signed and I
would recommend to the council you reserve action on it until that's completed.
Rountree: Could our action condition the annexation upon approval and recording of
the development agreement.
Gigray: The problem with the law when you pass an annexation ordinance, that
ordinance has to be published within a certain period of time and then the city engineer
and the city clerk have to file within a ten day period certified copies of these with the
various as you see in this ordinance. And so that just says by statutes says that duties
imposed so you can't have contingencies in these things and that's why I think the best
practice would be if there is a development agreement that has to be entered into, that
ought to be signed and seal and recorded and then you just go ahead and do this.
Rountree: So the real question is the development agreement appropriate?
Gigray: It depends on the history of this p~rticular case and unfortunately I don't have
the history to answer you question. It sound as if this individual's representing the
applicant that it is.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor question again for staff. Would it be staff's recommendation
either Brad or Gary or Shari that we have a development agreement for this particular
subdivision?
Stiles: Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council, this is kind of a new development
that has taken place that wanting to have the developments prior to the annexation. I
haven't worked with the applicant's representative to develop one of those yet, and I
believe legal counsel is currently working on aUf existing format to change that, and I
would like to be able to talk to Mr. Gigray and come up with some master document that
we can use before we have the development agreement. I guess if it's not referenced
in the annexation ordinance, I would prefer to have that development agreement done.
If it's not going to be included in the ordinance.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor if I could provide assistance to the mayor and council, I think if there
is to be a development agr~ement I think it should be entered into before annexation
because as you'll note these annexation ordinances also provide zoning designation at
the time of annexation as the statute requires you should do. And of course a condition
of a development agreement is that there are certain agreements on the part of the
applicant that they will do certain things as a consideration for being annexed and being
zoned in the zone and then if they don't do the development that they are required
within the specified period of time then ifs subject to de-annexation. And if that
agreement is not entered into before the annexation and the zoning designation then
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 9
the consideration for entering into it really is out the dOOf. Like the horse out of the
barn, but we certainly would be more than happy to work with the Planning and Zoning
Administrator and try to get this put together so that that is in hand. I just don't have the
history to provide you on this particular case any more than what I've said.
Rountree: Well my concern is that the applicant's been here at least three times at this
point for these actions to move forward and now we throw yet another wrinkle into this
process and it is a bit different than what we've done in the past. Maybe we've been in
error. And I don't know if there is a solution to take action on the three items we have
on the agenda that relate to this particular project. But it seems to me without the
annexation the variance and the preliminary plat are actions that we could not take
either until such time as the annexation were approved.
Gigray: It's clear and we have recent case authority in the Idaho Supreme Court that as
far as plat approval is concerned that you can take action on plat approval all the way
up to the final action without it being annexed into the city because you have the
approval authority anyway even if it's in the county so long as the final action of the city
on plat approval does not occur before annexation. And the final action according to the
Supreme Court is the approval by the city engineer of the final plat which occurs even
after council action has been taken on approving a final plat. So you can take all that
action regarding the platting process before annexation and still not be violative of Idaho
law.
Rountree: How about a variance to city ordinance? We're going to test you tonight Bill.
Gigray: And I think that's a more difficult question. I have a case where I was
representing some property owners in the City of Caldwell where we challenged the
special use permit that was issued before an annexation occurred and the court agreed
with my assessment that he couldn't grant a special use permit until the annexation and
zoning designation occurred. So I would say final action on a variance, unless it's a
variance in relationship to plat. And as I remember is this one a variance in the platting
process and I think as long as it's a variance in relationship to the platting process
you're fine. We're not talking about a variance on - somebody's trying to build a
building and we got a site distance problem or a setback or something like that, so I
think you are fine there too.
Rountree: Thanks for the lesson.
Corrie: We'll get this straight one of these days.
Rountree: Well given that input Mr. Mayor I move that we table action on Ordinance
#801 Thousand Springs I Farwest Annexation until such time as the development
agreement is developed and recorded.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 10
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Anderson that we table item
number 4 Ordinance #801 until the development agreement is presented to the council.
Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.5: AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH AND THE
PIPING OF THE RIDENBAUGH CANAL BY FARWEST DEVELOPERS - NORTH OF
VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have a question for the applicant. Have you had a chance to
read these Findings?
Bowcutt: The revised Findings including the Ridenbaugh? No, I have not.
Rountree: It does include the Ridenbaugh this time.
Bowcutt: I think that was the only thing that was lacking. I did read the previous
version.
Rountree: Okay, thank you.
Corrie: Any further questions?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that the City Council hereby adopts and approves the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
Bentley: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bentley to approve the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Bird, yea. Anderson, yea. Rountree, yea. Bentley, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that it is decided that the variance for the block length and
the piping of the Ridenbaugh Canal is hereby granted.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1 f 1998
Page 11
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second the decision that the variance of the block length and
piping the Ridenbaugh Canal is hereby granted. All those in favor of the motion say
aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.6: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED THOUSAND
SPRINGS SUBDIVISION BY FARWEST DEVELOPERS AND MARTY GOLDSMITH -
NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE.
Corrie: Council there was a request made to the developer to include lot number 58 in
block 4 part of the school park site. I guess Becky would you like to address that and
tell us what the developer has approved?
Bowcutt: Mayor Corrie contacted me and asked me to go back to the developer and
see if he would consider the elimination of this lot 58 located right here along the future
elementary site. I did meet with the developer, discussed it with him, urged him to go
ahead and eliminate that lot because it would improve the access to the school lot
which from what I'm hearing the feedback from the school district, that's what's going to
happen with that parcel. He has agreed to eliminate lot 58 as a residential lot and
merge that lot into the school site which would increase that acreage. I believe it's lot
58, block 4 so we'd like to include that in the record. The other issue J discussed with
Mayor Corrie after Council adopted the Findings, two weeks ago the Hanson's meet
with me outside and were questioning the lot numbers that were entered into part of the
record as part of the Findings. I believe it said lot 21 through lot 14, block 14. Their
question to me was is there any way to change that. They would like to see lots 22
through 16 and their reasoning there was their home sits back further on their parcel.
And they though the affect of lot 22 was far greater than the affects of the lots further to
the south and they said would you please talk to the developer and we'd be willing to
forego lot 13 and - I think it 13 and 14.
Corrie: 14, 15.
Bowcutt: 14 and 15, excuse me. Forego lot 14 and 15 if you would take it clear up to
lot 22,which is the last lot that backs up to them. Their home sits right in this vicinity
here and their concern is (Inaudible) 14 and 15 are of no consequence but lot 22 we
feel is problematic. As you turn the bend then these lots (inaudible) backing up and
facing the northern direction. Mayor Corrie said he did receive a letter from them. They
reference some different lots. I think they went to 24, but I believe they were going off
the old plan, which we renumbered when we made the staffs changes.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 12
Rountree: So those numbers again are 16-22.
Bowcutt: 16-22, which the difference would be seven lots versus eight. That was their
request. We'd be willing to just accept seven because those are the lots that most
adversely affect us with a two story and our privacy.
Rountree: And that will be a note on the plat?
Bowcutt: Yes. The previous plat that we agreed to one stories, we put on each lot.
Because we felt if it was placed in the notes, the builder may not recognize that but if it's
in bold letters on each lots, it's easily recognizable by your building department.
Anderson: Becky I have a question. Is there a home on that little piece of ground down
there too?
Bowcutt: No. (Inaudible). The next home over is west.
Anderson: And could I get you to mark the right numbers on this map for me so I know
which ones you are talking about, because those are kind of hard to read.
Bowcutt: (Inaudible).
Anderson: Okay, thank you.
Corrie: Becky I have a question on the lot 58 that we talked about is that going to be
deeded to the City of Meridian and then if the school doesn't use it then we do it as a
park site; is that correct?
Bowcutt: I believe the city preference is that we deed it to the city and then if the school
district needs it, then they get it.
Corrie: If they don't want it then it goes as a park.
Bowcutt: Correct. Then the city will retain ownership. The other issue that I wasn't
clear on is the 50 foot right-ot-ways with the 5 foot offset sidewalks. We discussed that
in length. When I came away from the meeting, my understanding was that I was to get
with staff and come up with some solution that would work so we didn't end up with our
pins under the sidewalk. I did submit information to Gary. An example of one plat
where it did work well. Gary and Shari looked at it and their comment was what if we
just go with a 20 foot setback from the back of the sidewalk and simplify it which
therefore would mean a 22 foot front yard setback and we agreed to that and our pins
will all be offset outside of the concrete so I believe that is resolved. But I'd like that to
be in the council's motion because when we bring the plans in say 60 days from now
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 13
people forget what was said and even though it's in the public record, if it's not in the
motion then Gary's staff says, no you've got to go with standard right-at-ways or 57 toot
right-of-ways, so we'd like to be in the motion. In closing I'd just like to remention I met
with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District board today on the pedestrian bridge issues.
They are granting us a license agreement for our vehicular bridge. The bridge for our
sewer water crossings. They indicated to me that they will not agree to the pedestrian
bridges until such time as the City of Meridian sits down with them and discusses the
issue of liability. And they said that it's been discussed in previous meetings. They
thought that you guys had come to some type of agreement with them, but they have
not seen anything in writing and they will not give us a license agreement for the
pedestrian crossings until the city agrees to some provisions that they've set forth. I
guess what we'll end up doing is trust funding with Ada County Highway District if that
cant' be accomplished and the monies will be there for those bridges until such time as
you guys can come to an agreement. I just wanted to pass that on since I had the
opportunity .
Corrie: Other questions from the Council?
Rountree: Question to Gary, as it relates to the 22 foot setback that does resolve your
issue with the pin placement.
Smith: Mayor and Council, Councilman Rountree, yeah I think it would. I just wanted to
be sure that we didn't have a problem with vehicles parking in the driveway and
extending out into the sidewalk area, and as Becky has indicated to me they've been
doing this in our city to the east of us and they haven't had a problem with the utility
trench situation in that front yard easement and that was another concern that I had. So
it's apparently working elsewhere. Thank you.
Anderson: Is that block 4 where those lots are?
Bird: 14.
Rountree: Lot 58.
Bowcutt: (Inaudible)
Corrie: Any further discussion?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve the preliminary plat for Thousand Springs
Subdivision conditioned on staff comments that the plat indicate a 22 foot setback as
described by the applicant. That the plat indicate that lots 16-22 of block 14 be
identified as single level building lots and that the plat indicate that lot 58, block 4 will
now be part of the potential or future school or parks area.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 14
Bentley: Second.
Corrie: Do you want to discuss that deed it to the city, Charlie? However you want to
work it. I'll take your motion as stated.
Rountree: Did it get second?
Bentley: I'll withdraw my second.
Rountree: I'll just make a motion to amend my motion.
Bentley: Second.
Corrie: We have a motion made by Mr. Rountree and second by Mr. Bentley the motion
as stated and also as amended. Any further discussion?
Anderson: I have one more question. This bridge that goes across for the vehicle
traffic if an agreement doesn't get reached between us and Nampa Meridian, is there
enough room for school kids to get by on that without going out into the traffic to make it
to this school property?
Bowcutt: Yes, they have sidewalks on both sides.
Anderson: Okay.
Bowcutt: Standard ACHD.
Anderson: All right, thank you.
Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: I want to thank Becky and the developer for graciously giving that block 4
number 58. Thank you Becky.
ITEM NO.7: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONTRACTOR'S
YARD BY DONOVAN HANSON - LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF PLAYGROUND SUBDIVISION.
Corrie: Mr. Hanson is it? Okay.
(
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 15
Gigray: Mr. Mayor, I apologize for the interruption. Is the purpose of this gentleman I
just noticed in the materials that were provided to me for this particular line item that he
was going to be asked some questions and if this is part of the public hearing where you
are getting information in a public hearing I would suggest that he be sworn so that it is
clear as part of the record. If it's only informational and has nothing to do with your
decision making, then I would say just address the council. I just need to clarify if it's
part of the record or not.
Corrie: Council would you like to have this on record? We haven't noticed it as a public
hearing, but we can get his name and address.
Rountree: It is my understanding the intent to having the applicant here was to get
some information and to get a general understanding from him that he had read and
understood the terms and conditions of the conditional use since it appeared that he
had taken action prior to receiving the conditional use permit.
Gigray: I just wasn't sure when I saw that and I'm sorry for - it's your choice.
Corrie: We good that you did that. I guess Council has some questions in relevance to
this.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor my question for Mr. Hanson was had he an opportunity to read
and understand the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as it related to the
conditional use permit?
Hanson: No. I have not received those that I'm aware of.
Rountree: And my other question is that it appears that you are already operating this
yard and you are operating the yard prior to the conditional use permit being
recommended by Planning and Zoning. It has not been acted on by City Council at this
point. (End of Tape)
Rountree: Is that correct?
Hanson: Yes.
Rountree: My final question is if there are terms and conditions in that conditional use
permit that are counter to your current activities, are you ready to stop those activities
and abide by the terms and conditions of the Findings and Facts?
Hanson: Okay, clarify activities.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 16
Rountree: Your activities on this particular parcel as it relates to your storage, and I'm
not sure that what you are doing is in compliance with the conditional use permit that
being proposed. Maybe staff can assist me in that endeavor. Shari you had comments
previously that this activity was taking place without a conditional use permit.
Stiles: Yes, and the applicant was informed that that was not permitted.
Rountree: And are those activities now covered under the terms of the conditional use
permit that's being proposed and for our consideration? Is he compliant with the
conditional use permit will his activities be in compliance?
Stiles: No.
Rountree: Okay, that's what I thought.
Corrie: I have a question Mr. Hanson, you said you hadn't had a chance to see these
Findings of Facts. Is there any particular reaso'n that you haven't or you just didn't get
them? Or what?
Hanson: It depends on what they are. I've got lots of paper here with lots of stuff.
Corrie: Actually what we're saying here is that in order to have the contractor's yard,
you need a conditional use permit. Okay, and you don't have it.
Hanson: I don't have that.
Corrie: But you have a yard there anyway.
Hanson: Yeah, I guess I do.
Corrie: Okay that's what we're getting at is you're there illegally.
Hanson: It sounds that way.
Corrie: And there are certain specifications that you have to have to have that
contractor's yard. It's in this Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. One is
landscaping and you have to have a berm. You don't have that now.
Hanson: No.
Corrie: I guess what they are asking for is would you abide and get all this done that's
required and when?
(
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 17
Hanson: And when. I'll start on it right away. I can't guarantee a date.
Corrie: I guess one of the things we're concerned here is that you've done it and if we
pass this conditional use permit and let you have it, you've got to do all things that's in
here and showing that you are doing that, and that's what we're confused here.
Hanson: Okay. I was looking for a place to park machinery to provide a service. I
approached the owner of this property and he said it's zoned commercial, come on.
(inaudible) next door to me. You sure can park there. So, we take our little trucks and
go over there and park and I considered well maybe I'd like to buy this. And somebody
says you better check a little closer to see if you are legal. So we proceed to check to
see if we're legal and we find out we aren't. So I though okay if I want to buy this, then I
better get approval. I'll either go trucking down the road and find another spot or we'll
do what we need to do.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor my concern for Mr. Hanson is to make sure that you have an
opportunity to read those Findings and Facts and know what the conditions are that are
being set forth for your activity on that piece of property and have an opportunity for you
to come back and discuss those with the Council before we take action on those. There
maybe something in there that you either don't want to comply with or can't comply with
and we need to give you that opportunity to see that, read the conditions and then get
back to us before we take an action. That's why we tabled it previously.
Hanson: Okay.
Rountree: And since you haven't had a opportunity to review the Findings and Facts,
my suggestion is that we defer action on it yet again until you have an opportunity to
look at it and then get back to us at our next meeting.
Hanson: Do we have Findings and Facts prepared?
Anderson: It sounds like you have part of them because you talked about the berm and
that is that you just didn't know what they were?
Hanson: Is that this?
Rountree: That's just the city letter.
Anderson: So Shari was he given a copy of those or Will?
Berg: Councilman Anderson, Mayor and Council, I'm not for sure if he received a copy.
It was made available. We called each applicant prior to the meeting and say you're
packet is ready to pick up. Do you want it faxed to you or do you want it picked up?
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 18
There isn't sufficient time to mail the packets out prior to the meeting for them to receive
it. I can't tell you positively if he received a packet. It's made available.
Anderson: Well then can you make sure he get a packet tonight before he leave here.
Corrie: You can have that one. That's got everything in it that you are going to need,
and I would suggest that you do that and come back after you've read that so that you
know really what you need to do before we act on the conditional use permit.
Bird: If we do this Council has just said that we will probably have to have is he's going
to act or disagree with some of them, we're going to have to have a public hearing on
this. And in the meantime if we're going to my view is if he don't have a conditional use
permit, why is he using the lot now? That's got to cease until he gets the conditional
use permit.
Corrie: Yeah, I think Council would have to go back to public hearing to get testimony
from him; is that correct?
Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the council, if as you're doing tonight you're just
asking him if he has received them, has he read it, does he understand it and then you
want to an action. No, I don't think you need a hearing, but if you are going to have this
gentleman comment about whether he can comply or not comply with the conditions of
this proposed special use permit and we get into an issue about whether those
conditions should be changed, and why they should be changed, I think that
neighboring property owners are entitled to notice and they are entitled to an
opportunity to be present and also present testimony that would be relevant to the
issues of what should be in a special use condition and yes you should have a public
hearing if that's what you intend to do.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor my intent is not for a public hearing. My intent is so the applicant
has an opportunity to review and understand the Findings of Facts so when we act on
them it doesn't catch him by surprise. If he can get through that this evening, we can
continue this or table it until we get through the rest of our agenda and have him have
an opportunity to sit out there and go through the Findings of Fact tonight, have him
come back and have you read them, do you understand them? Then take action on the
Findings of Fact. That's alii intend to do.
Corrie: We could do that. There would be no comments from him though.
Rountree: Other than he's had an opportunity to read and understand them.
Corrie: Do you want to read them and come back later this evening.
r"
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 19
Hanson: Okay.
Corrie: All right then we'll just continue item 7 then until the last part of the evening you
have a chance to read that and then we'll ask you again if you understand it and agree
to all those. Okay?
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I move that we table this conditional use permit for Donovan Hanson
until after item number 15.
Rountree: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird and second by Mr. Rountree to table this item number
7 until item number 15. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say
aye?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.8: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE FOR OFF-PREMISE SIGN AT S. PROGRESS AVENUE 11-84 BY R.T.
NAHAS COMPANY.
Corrie: Council you have the variance Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the
request. Any questions?
Bentley: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Anderson: None.
Corrie: I'll entertain a motion on the Findings of Facts.
Anderson: Mr. Mayor I make a motion we approve the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for the variance for off-premise sign for R.T. Nahas and Company.
Bentley: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Bird, yea. Anderson, yea. Rountree, yea. Bentley, yea.
Corrie: Motion for the decision.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 20
Anderson: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we accept the decision that is for the
variance for the off-premise sign be hereby granted.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second the decision of the motion of the variance for the off-
premise sign is hereby granted. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion
say aye.
MO-TION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.9: FINAL PLAT FOR HAVEN COVE NO.8 BY MERIDIAN LAND
DEVELOPMENT CO. - SOUTH OF W. CHERRY LANE AND EAST TEN MILE RD.
Corrie: Council do you have any questions of staff?
Bentley: I have a question for staff. Gary, Shari is all the particulars been responded to
and everything in order?
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, Councilman Bentley I have not received a
response from the applicant on our comments unless city clerk has recently received it.
So without that response I can only assume that they are in agreement with our
requests for your approval.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I believe there some individuals in the audience (inaudible) that
particular question.
Jacobs: We have read the comments by staff and do agree with the comments and we
can comply with them.
Bentley: That's all I have.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the final plat for Haven Cove No.8
subject to conditions of staff.
Bentley: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree and second by Mr. Bentley that we approve the
final plat of Haven No.8 with approval of the staff. Any further comments? All those in
favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 21
ITEM NO. 10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
MAWS NO.3 BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - NORTH OF EAST PINE AND
WEST OF NORTH LOCUST GROVE.
Corrie: At this time I'll open the public hearing and invite the representative from Maws
Subdivision No.3 to testify.
RICHARD PAVELEK 915 W. JEFFERSON WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
Pavelek: The owner of this property has had this land for approximately six years. It
was originally developed in two phases, Maws 1 and 2 and there was an annexation
order and I believe it's ordinance 580 that brought the land in, and under that it was
zoned R-8 zoning category. Also specific in that ordinance was a number of lots that
would be considered. It was 4510t5 in phases one and two of Maws there have been
36 lots with homes constructed on that property. It wasn't developed at that time
because of a development that was proposed down the adjacent street and so it sat
there undeveloped for a number of years and we basically are in need of starting off
with a development plan for this as a separate. It will not have any direct access to the
adjacent or prior phases. We submitted a number - two applications. One was for a
conditional use. The other was for a preliminary plat. And I believe that you have
copies in your file that show the proposed layout. In prior action by the Planning and
Zoning Commission they were some items that were discussed and have since been
clarified. I think the first one which was of great concern to the Planning and Zoning
Commission was the issue related to irrigation rights, and there was in staff report an
item that inferred that the owner had not proceeded according to the ordinance with the
irrigation rights for phases one and two. We have since gone through the city archives
at the city treasurers office and we provided you in your packet copies of the receipts
for payment of items associated with the development of those phases and specifically
the well development fee, which was the mechanism for exclusive this project out, so
the irrigation issue was taken care of at that time and should not have been brought up
at the time of the commission. Basically follow the ordinance at the time in terms of
asking for an exclusion, it was granted, and paid for at that time. So that item should
not have been part of the previous record. In terms of the density both by a calculation
of this specific development as well the overall original anticipated density, we're well
within the allowed density of the R-8 zone as well as the overall density for this property.
One of the things that has changed in the time that this property was originally
subdivided and now where we are looking at the final remnant parcel is that there is a
desire among the public to have basically low maintenance yards, and have a
townhouse type of unit which is self-owned. Each side would be self owned. And that's
specifically what the applicant is proposing. These basically are tend to be a loose
category of buyer, but generally it's people without children that would like to cut down
on the maintenance and would prefer to spend their time other places rather than their
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 22
back yard. By the standard of the townhouse, these are large lots nevertheless. They
do have in the side yards on each open side of the property a 15 foot setback from the
side property lines. So thereJs 30 feet between the units. In terms of the size of the
units if we would have proposed basically a duplex unit for these properties the house
size is sufficient to meet the ordinance standard for a duplex. As far as a single family
unit, no, they do not make the 1300 square foot minimum for single family, but that is
not the type of housing we hope to build here. These are large - the interior space is
three bedroom unit is large for a unit of this type. There are two elements that we think
need to be addressed in the proposal that we have made. First one is basically the
street frontage. Street frontage being proposed is 45 feet per lot. The second item that
we would request the council consider is modifying the original annexation order of
single family being determined by only detached units. The ordinance, I guess it was a
surprise when I went back to it and finally gained a copy and read through it, there was
an exclusion of detached units, and it may have made some sense at that time but we
would propose that at this point the townhouses that are proposed as attached units be
the appropriate form of development on this parcel and that you consider the
modification to that annexation order to allow for the attached units. I think that those
are the predominant factors. I think we've tried to address all of the issues, the
servicing in previous correspondence. As far as we can determine we have suitable
street access. We have all the utilities. We've accommodated the underground line
that currently is there. That line dates back to a farm field and I guess no one at the
time of development of the first two phases were in fact aware of it, but we have
accommodated that, and we would meet all other requirements of the Meridian
ordinances if we could deal with those two items. Currently the preliminary plat has
been tabled pending the outcome of the conditional use hearing so that's what we're
here to discuss and I'd be pleased to answer any questions. Mr. Gregory the owner of
the property is here. I guess he has looked from his perspective he has looked at
adjacent properties or properties within a mile of this. It seemed to him to be a similar
type of project. He has seen townhouse units that are down to about 800 square feet in
size and his perception is that those would be self owned and would be a smaller
standard of street frontage. We don't know that for a fact ,but we know that the product
is there, and I'm sure that beyond ours there are going to be other proposal for units of
this type. So we could answer any of your questions and be pleased to do so.
Corrie: Council, any questions?
Bentley: I have none.
Bird: I have none.
Rountree: I have a question for staff. The conditional use process is why? Because
the change and desire to use or to move away from the annexation ordinance or is this
a PUD? I mean conditional use is not a normal process for a subdivision.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 23
Stiles: Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council, this was initially proposed with a
preliminary plat and a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit was required
as a planned development because they did not meet the ordinance requirements. The
preliminary plat was not tabled. It was denied by Planning and Zoning Commission.
However the conditional use permit had to go forward because of the way the ordinance
reads.
Pavelek: Mayor and Council if I could the reason why we basically asked for a
conditional use was simply to deal with the street frontage were deficient in fact in that
aspect and there is no determination in the Meridian ordinance but as far as what
classifies a zero lot line unit. It's a single family but its standards are not spelled out so
what we wanted to do is to try and find a way of bringing an acceptable project to
council that could be approved in the CU process seemed to be the viable way of doing
so.
Corrie: Any other questions? Thank you, sir. Is there anybody else from the public
who would like to issue testimony on this item? Okay. Hearing none, I will close the
public hearing and now for discussion from the council.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, reviewing the documents and the plan for this project, I'm inclined
to agree with the P & Z in denying this conditional use permit. I'm prepared to make a
motion if there's no more discussion.
Corrie: Any further discussion?
Bird: I have none.
Corrie: I'll entertain a motion.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move that we adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
as presented by the P & Z and denying the conditional use permit for Maws Subdivision
No.3.
Rountree: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Rountree to approve the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law by the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny the
applicant conditional use permit. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the
motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 24
ITEM NO. 11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR BRIGHT BEGINNINGS LEARN1NG CENTER TO LAURIE M. ROY
BY LAURIE M. ROY - 510 E. WATER TOWER LANE.
Corrie: I will open the public hearing and invite the representative from Bright
Beginnings Learning Center to come forward.
LAURIE ROY 1866 E. SUMMERIDGE DRIVE WAS SWORN BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY.
Corrie: And you are wanting to transfer the conditional use permit that's there now to
you, right?
Roy: Yes.
Corrie: Did I see you on television?
Roy: Yes.
Corrie: I had to bring it up, didn't I? I didn't mean to embarrass you at all.
Roy: It's okay. I've been in the public eye a lot this week.
Corrie: Council, questions?
Rountree: I have none from Ms. Roy, but I would have a question for Shari. Do you
have any issues or concerns with this transfer?
Stiles: No, I don't.
Rountree: Thank you. I have nothing else.
Corrie: Even prettier in public.
Rountree: Now Mayor.
Corrie: (Inaudible).
Rountree: You have to have a talk with Jerry. Okay, if there's anybody else from the
public who would like to issue testimony in this issue. I almost forgot what I was doing.
Okay. I'll close the public hearing. Council, what's your pleasure?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, question, does this require Findings or just a -
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 25
Corrie: This is a conditional use permit. Bill would this require Findings?
Gigray: I think on transfer I think what you do is you just have a hearing and assure that
the transfer is being made and is authorized and since it doesn't change any of the
terms and conditions of the conditional use permit I don't see that it's necessary.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the request for transfer of conditional use
permit for Bright Beginnings Learning Center to Laurie Roy.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Bird to transfer the conditional use
permit for Bright Beginnings Learning Center to Laurie M. Roy. Any further discussion?
Hearing none, I shall take a vote. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO. 12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR APPROVED SIGN
ADVERTISING BUSINESS ON PART OF LOT 3 BY AV II LLC -1650 E. FAIRVIEW
AVENUE.
Corrie: I will open the public hearing and invite and Mr. Ford.
HAROLD FORD WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
Corrie: Do you have anything you want to tell the councilor do you just want to answer
questions or what?
H. Ford: Well pretty much our reason for asking for the variance is stated in the
application and standards for variances. Our business is set back about five hundred
feet from Fairview and the traffic on Fairview is increasing approximately about 25,000
cars per week day. And we believe that the people in the vehicles have difficulty seeing
business back because of the landscaping, the cars, the additional cars that are parked
in the parking lot to visit Fred Meyer. That an approved sign on that landscape berm
parallel to Fairview Avenue would enhance our business. What we propose is
consistent with what has already been approved. We think that it will improve our
business which of course is the reason for being business so we're asking for approval
of the variance so that we can get the sign erected.
Corrie: Okay. Council questions?
Bentley: Yes, Mr. Ford are these are the businesses that are back there?
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 26
H. Ford: Yes.
Bentley: So we're not going to see another request for another sign to be put out there.
H. Ford: No.
Bentley: We have everybody listed on there.
H. Ford: Yes.
Bentley: Thank you.
H. Ford: It's five businesses on lot 2.
Corrie: Any questions?
Rountree: Question for Shari. Any comments?
Stiles: Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council, I did receive a phone call today from
someone that works for Avest. I don't know if they've talked to Mr. Ford about it. They
seemed to having some problem with Fred Meyer as to approving this sign location and
the sign itself. They have some kind of approval process. Fred Meyer even though
they don't own the property is able to have some control over what happens out on
Fairview. And what this Avest representative told me that they wouldn't agree to this
sign unless they could also get another monument sign approved on Fairview as well.
They want to put all the tenants, the Starbucks, whatever else is in that development on
another monument sign. They were proposing this sign as approximately 160 square
feet. And I don't know if that would include Mr. Ford's business or not, but maybe he
hasn't been notified of that since I just got that call today, maybe they haven't contacted
him, but I would hate to have him get approved and then find that he has to be in a
different location on Fairview or I'm not really aware of where that is right now.
H. Ford: Well we're aware that Fred Meyer has some approval over signage on the
site. And I'm not absolutely positive where that stands. But we felt that if we could get
approval for this sign, we would negotiate - we would be able to negotiate with Fred
Meyer, because there are some other options for signage which could include Fred
Meyer tenants that maybe Fred Meyer hasn't had a discussion with Avest. It possibly
wouldn't require any more signage than what we're requesting so that's our idea here.
Corrie: Shari, did Fred Meyer have anything to do with those other monument signs up
there? Did they have to give their approval at the same time like the McDonald's and
the Bagels and what have you?
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 27
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, that's a private agreement I guess as part of their lease.
I was just made aware of that today. I wasn't aware of their approval process for any of
those signs.
Corrie: Was it the Starbucks that is the one that they are having a question on or is it all
those stores in the Fred Meyer area in their store area? Ice cream, there's TCBY and -
well
(Inaudible)
Stiles: Fred Meyer is interested in a sign that would include, I don't that it's all the
tenants in the building where the Ford's are plus the Fred Meyer building or just their
tenants. I haven't seen any proposed signage just that they had indicated that they
wanted 160 square foot monument sign that would include the tenants within the Fred
Meyer building.
Anderson: How many monument signs do we have out there on that parcel right now?
I mean are we going to just keep getting more and more requests from every business
that goes in there to keep adding monument signs? I guess I get concerned to the point
where pretty soon traffic can't see to even get out on Fairview because there are so
many monument signs blocking their vision.
Stiles: Scott Weber with Avest also called me today and he's also interested in getting
a variance for another off premise sign on Locust Grove for another lot they have left to
develop in there and they also want pole signs for the Star-It rental on Locust Grove. I
don't know if they want anything else on Fairview, but there is quite a proliferation of
monument signs out there.
Anderson: And again I think this gets back to it's that problem. OUf sign ordinance I
don't think it really took into consideration when it written these type of developments
and all the spin off signs that may be requested there so we don't really have a good
handle on how to deal with these at this point.
Stiles: Right.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor, if I might for the Mayor and Council and also for those testifying in
this matter and just to reacquaint the central issue which needs to be dealt with because
this I understand is an application which is under 11-2419 is to authorize variances from
the terms of the ordinance you have to find that it will not contrary to the public interest
and then there have to be special conditions for literal enforcement of the provisions of
the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship. And so those are critical issue of
fact. Of course anyone speaking on this matter needs to deal with and then you have to
(
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 28
find if you are going to grant a variance that are such special circumstances or
conditions affecting the property that strict application of the provisions of the ordinance
would clearly be impractical or unreasonable so that's one burden of proof that has to
be established here to grant a variance and secondly that a strict compliance with the
requirements of the ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the owner and
the nature and condition or adjacent development or other physical conditions or other
conditions that make strict compliance with this ordinance unreasonable under the
circumstances or that the conditions or requirements of the ordinance will result in
inhibiting achievements of the objectives of the ordinance, so those are the kinds of
facts and questions you are probably going to want to ask this applicant and anybody
else is what are the existing circumstances there that make this an undue hardship to
them? What circumstances exist on neighboring properties that make this an absolute
necessity and why would a literal interpretation of the ordinance make this necessary.
Corrie: Do you want to take a stab at it Harold?
H. Ford: Which part of the question? Which ones?
Corrie: Let's try the hardship one. I guess that would be one of the questions.
Correct?
Gigray: Certainly.
H. Ford: Well we've been in our business now for more than two years, and I can't give
you any precise date about the number of people who come into our store, and say I
just found you, how long have you been here? We had trouble finding you. We
persevered through the shopping center because we just knew that there had t9 be a
store like yours in here. Other store owners talk about the same thing and we have
reason to believe that the traffic on Fairview Avenue which is one reason for being in
the shopping center anyway. No one would put a shopping center like that out in Star
somewhere. There's 25,000 cars per week day and the businessmen hope to take
advantage of that traffic. And we're the only business in the shopping center that isn't
advertised on Fairview. All of the others are and I don't know how long the frontage is
on the shopping center. That's one measurement I didn't get, but when you drive along
there, I think a reasonable person would say that the signs are attractive and there isn't
a clutter of signs there, and our sign meets the sign that we have proposed meets the
requirements of the Planning and Zoning Commission for area and for style and so we
think it would attractive and there's room there. It doesn't any vision triangle. Our
properties are certainly taxed on the value of the commerce that can be derived and we
believe that the signage will enhance our commerce and so that's the whole reason for
this.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 29
Gigray: Mr. Mayor with your permission you might inquire from this particular applicant
as to what particular circumstances exist this piece of property that don't similarly exist
in other pieces of property in terms of why this variance is necessary and he might
specifically state under the ordinance where his sign would have to be placed and under
this proposal where it would be placed and why it makes a difference.
H. Ford: Our property that is set back to the rear of the shopping center. All the other
properties are at the front of the shopping center, and of course Fred Meyer is big
enough building so that nobody can miss that. That's the reason. What was the other
part Mr. Counsel?
Gigray: Just the difference if you comply with the ordinance where your sign would be
placed and given the variance that you request where it would be placed and why that
makes a difference.
H. Ford: Yeah, in part of our application attached a drawing as completely as I could
where the approximate location of our sign and it's behind a 20 by 20 vision triangle
which I think is more than adequate for the driveway.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor with your permission would this be offered as an exhibit at this
hearing?
Corrie: We have a copy.
Gigray: Well we should identify it as part of the record if that's what he wishes to do.
Corrie: Okay. Shari do you have a copy of this one? We have it too.
Anderson: On ours it's so small you can't see where the sign is.
Corrie: It would be right here.
(End of Tape)
Rountree: ... relates to being in compliance with the ordinance. You're asking for a
variance from the ordinance from the sign ordinance. You can have the sign. Why do
you need the variance?
H. Ford: Because that part of the shopping center is off premise. It's off premise for our
businesses.
Corrie: Any other questions that we need for facts?
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 30
Gigray: No, I just thought that the record needed to be a little bit clearer about what was
being asked here and what particular circumstances existed in this application so that
you can consider those facts and then anybody else could come in on it as well before
you make your decision.
H. Forq: Well the particular circumstance is that we are asking permission to erect a
sign on a part of the shopping center which is considered to be off premise and so we're
asking for a variance to that part of the original permit.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor for purposes of the record you might ask him if he's talking about off
premises, he's talking about his premise. In other words they are proposed sign will be
on somebody else's premises.
H. Ford: Essentially yes, it's my understanding that this sign will be erected on a part of
the common berm area of that berm.
Corrie: And your business is back so for the public record it's back in the back off from
the berm back behind the Fred Meyer to the west, right?
H. Ford: Yes, it's back approximately 500 feet.
Corrie: Okay, any further questions? Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like
to issue testimony at the public hearing on item 12?
ROB HAGGETT WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
Haggett: I did speak with Shari this morning concerning the Fred Meyer question in
signage. At this point we assume that Fred Meyer will be accepting the location of the
sign on the property. The property in question is owned by AV II LLC. At this point we
feel a sign is very necessary for these tenants. The back northwest corner of the
property and as Mr. Ford mentioned their location is such that with growth of
landscaping and cars and traffic in the shopping center their location is unduly missed
by many of the people traveling through the sh,opping center. I think the issue of
whether or not Fred Meyer will be requesting sign approval on Fairview Avenue is a
moot point. That's something that they may never do. I don't believe they have put in
any type of request for permit to build a sign, a monument sign type for their smaller
tenants and that's alii have.
Corrie: Any questions?
Bentley: Thank you. I don't feel that they're possibly going forth is a moot issue
because Councilman Anderson said that pretty soon we'll have a whole row of them out
there and I'd like to see them all combined on one. I understand their predicament back
(-
(r
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 31
there as far as being off premise and hard to spot and I'm in agreement that they
probably should have a sign up front but I'd like to see them coordinated together if
that's going to be what's to be.
Haggett: Yeah, I think unfortunately in dealing with Fred Meyer and this is rumor that's
heard from their leasing that and typically in most of their shopping centers they do not
provide for signage for their smaller tenants. In this case if they decided at a future date
to provide for signage it could drag this out to a point years down the road with trying to
get things accomplished through a corporation like Fred Meyer takes years and years to
get it through the upper level and the lower level and finally get a stamp and signature.
We're at a point now that we're ready to construct the sign. We'd like to start taking
advantage of the increased traffic on Fairview as soon as possible for our tenants back
there. I also feel that the amount of signs that are on Fairview Avenue right now fit
within the vision triangles which have been designated by the City of Meridian. The
signage ordinance not being so specific as to say we only allow so many monument
signs on a certain linear length of road, I think if those were more specific then we may
be able to say well we've got enough signs. But at this point, there's nothing that I know
of that specifies how many monument signs are allowed to be located on a certain
stretch of road.
Bentley: Thank you. That's alii had.
Rountree: I have a question. You indicate that the folks wishing this sign are tenants.
Haggett: Yes, sir.
Rountree: And who is the landlord?
Haggett: A V II LLC is the landlord.
Rountree: And they own the berm?
Haggett: They own the portion of the berm on the Key Bank parcel which would be
placing the sign on. It's actually within the shopping center confines. It's considered a
common area, which is a commonly maintained. by every tenant in the shopping center.
Corrie: Anyone else who wish to issue testimony.
JANET FORD WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
J. Ford: My name is Janet Ford 992 E. Kingsford Drive, Meridian. I just want to say that
as of this date, we have applied for a variance for a sign. Fred Meyer has made no
Meridian City Council
September 1 f 1998
Page 32
attempt at applying for a sign. I don't think your decision about our sign should hinge on
something that Fred Meyer mayor may do in the future. That's alii have to say.
Corrie: Is there additional testimony? Okay, hearing none, I shall close the public
hearing. Council further discussion?
Rountree: I have a question for Shari. Go ahead and define it for me. What is off
premise mean?
Stiles: It's a sign that's located on a lot - the sign has to be located on the lot where the
activity or service is offered. This is not - they are not proposing it on a common area.
It is a separate platted lot. Whether they consider it common area for the purposes of
their lease agreements is immaterial as far as whether it's an off premise sign.
Rountree: All under the same ownership.
Stiles: But it is a separate lot.
Rountree: Okay.
Corrie: Other comments? I think we need a motion for the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law for the variance; is that correct?
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move that we instruct the city attorney to provide to prepare
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the variance for approved advertising sign.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley and second by Mr. Bird to have the attorney draw
up the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the variance for approved sign. Any
further discussion? Hearing none all those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor can I seek clarification of the motion as I assume you wish those to
the next council meeting on the 15?
Corrie: Yes.
Gigray: Thank you.
(
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 33
ITEM NO. 13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR TILING OF
IRRIGATION DITCHES CROSSING THE SITE BY R.C. WILLEY HOME
FURNISHINGS - NE CORNER OF EAGLE AND FRANKLIN ROADS.
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the applicant or their
representative to come forward for any questions and presentation.
JERRY LOWE WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
Lowe: Assisting R.C. Willey in the development of the project site. If I can explain the
site, the property is located on the northeast corner of Franklin and Eagle Roads. On
the north border of the property there's an existing drainage channel termed the Evans
Drain. We're requesting a variance from the ordinance requiring tiling of ditches within
the city and I would like you to consider two factors. First being that in discussion with
staff we understand that pipes larger than 48 inches in diameter have been granted a
variance from this tiling ordinance. The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District is requiring if
we do tile it, it would be the same diameter as the pipe that crosses Eagle Road which
is a 60 inch diameter. The second factor I would like you to consider is that the
development has occurred along the Seven Drain to the west for as far as we're able to
tell no piping has been required or put in place on those developments. I'm not sure of
the timing of those developments but some recently appear from Meridian Academy as
one example and the Meridian School District Transportation facility to the west which
back up to this same drainage and there is no tiling bin done in those locations. So
from a consideration of equity and consistency I would like you to consider that. I have
no further comments, and I will take questions.
Corrie: Questions of Council?
Rountree: Do you have any plans to clean up or modify the ditch bank at all or the drain
way in terms of coordinating at all with your landscape development the property?
Lowe: At this point our request is to request the variance from tiling. If you would like to
suggest some other alternatives, we'd be happy to do that, but I would like to note that
any efforts that we make within an open ditch need to meet the r~quirements of Nampa
Meridian Irrigation District. In my past experience with those they've been reluctant to -
reluctant is probably an understatement, have not allowed extensive landscaping in
those areas as far as any growth of shrubs and trees. .
Rountree: Thank you.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor I would suggest to the Councilor to the Mayor that you might inquire
particularly of the applicant here as to what circumstances or conditions that would exist
where strict application of the provision of tiling would make it impractical or
('
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 34
unreasonable for the developer to comply. That would be the first suggestion. The
second suggestion that I would have because of matters of public concern and interest
are involved that the applicant might address a question with regards to the proposed
use of the property, the existence of this as an open ditch as to potential safety issues
involved with persons using the area might help provide information to the council in
terms of considering this application.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor before we delve into those questions it's my understanding that
our ordinance allows us to waive the tiling requirement. Either variance or waiver in this
case would be consistent with actions taken in the past on any tiling that's over 48
inches. Just to point that out to Counsel if that's something that we would want to
consider at this point in terms of just waiving this and not proceeding on with the
variance.
Gigray: If you have an ordinance provision that provides for that, it will make it a lot
simpler. I haven't seen that. I don't know where it's -
Rountree: Is that correct, Shari?
Stiles: Yes, Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council, at the last meeting we had John
Prior brought up the fact that it said the Council may waive that requirement. Our
history has been every ditch that's not going to be tiled has had to go through this
variance process. If it can be waived, thafs wonderful.
Gigray: Does the ordinance say that?
Stiles: That it may waive this requirement.
Rountree: I guess I have a question when you are through with your testimony.
Lowe: I'm through.
Rountree: I'm not going to ask those questions that Bill proposed. Do you have a letter
from Nampa Meridian indicating the pipe sizing? The documents -
Lowe: We do not have a letter, but we've been in discussion with them for the
requirements for irrigation throughout and that has been (inaudible), but I don't have a
written, but would be glad to furnish that.
Corrie: Any other questions? Thank you, sir. Anyone else from the public who would
like to issue testimony on item number 13? Okay, I'll close the public hearing. Council I
guess you've got some options here.
(
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 35
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I have a question for Gary. Could you verify the scale of that pipe
through Eagle Road? Is 16 inches consistent with what your observations have been?
Smith: I don't have any first hand knowledge on that Councilman Rountree on the
diameter of that pipe or the that crosses used to be Locust Grove and now called Nola.
I'm sorry. I just don't have that information. Mr. Mayor, I wonder has the applicant had
any conversation with Nampa Meridian concerning the piping of this ditch?
Rountree: Yes, they indicated that they talked to them and that Nampa Meridian wants
it the same size as the pipe that's going under Eagle Road which is 16 inch.
Smith: Nampa Meridian did not respond to City of Meridian in any written format?
Rountree: Not in written format.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor for consideration by the Council if there is a provision in the
ordinance that allows for a waiver you if it meets certain criteria in diameter and
whatever you could conditionally grant a waiver subject to their submitting proof to staff
that it meets the waiver provision if you choose to go that way.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I would make a motion that we would waive the requirements for
tiling the ditches with the comment that we have proof in writing from Nampa Meridian
that that ditch does indeed require something in excess of 48 inches.
Bi rd : Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley second by Mr. Bird to waive the tiling on the
condition that the ditch people give them the condition that it would take more than a 48
inch pipe to tile it. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of the
motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO.7: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONTRACTORJS
YARD BY DONOVAN HANSON - LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF PLAYGROUND SUBDIVISION.
Corrie: Back to you.
Hanson: I have read the Facts and Findings. I come up against item Hand J. It talks
about gravel driveways, paved parking. We already have paved entrance. We have
paved parking. Do we want more paving? This is kind of a gray area for me. And j
talking about parking lot lighting for the (inaudible) and lighting plans for the Chevron
Station. We don't have Chevron out there. We could import one.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 36
Rountree: It's there to test how well you read the Findings.
Hanson: I see. I'm doing good. I'm doing quite well. We get back to the paving.
What's code or expectation for that? This will playa big part in what we do.
Rountree: Other than those points of clarification everything else is consistent.
Hanson: Everything else is fine. We've been over that with Planning and Zoning.
Rountree: Okay.
Corrie: I'm sorry to have that - your reading is very good. I see it there they've taken it
from some place else and put it in that one. That wouldn't be part of their -
Rountree: Shari can you offer some clarification on the paving and lighting? And you
don't have to apologize for the Chevron reference.
Stiles: Councilman Rountree, Mayor and Council the parking asphalt parking lot that's
there I don't know that it would cover all of the off street parking and driveway areas for
the site. The lighting was a comment by Bruce Freckleton just for security lighting and if
there were some lighting plans to be reviewed to make sure that they cause the glare
problems that we've had in the past. Anything else?
Rountree: Are those responses understandable to you?
Hanson: Yeah, I don't think we'll be having any lighting. It creates opportunity for
vandalism. It's suppose to prevent it.
Rountree: Okay, thanks.
Hanson: Anything else?
Corrie: Any other questions? I might suggest to the council that you make a date
certain that this requirements of the conditional use permit are met. Just from my
standpoint I think you need to have a time limit.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that Meridian City Council adopts and approves the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as prepared by Planning and Zoning
Commission.
Bird: Second.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 37
Corrie: Motion made and second that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law as set forth by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Anderson, yea. Rountree, yea. Bentley, yea. Bird, yea.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: I'll entertain a motion for decision.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that the Meridian City Council approve the conditional use
permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the
conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with the amendment
that the applicant will be in compliance with the conditional use permit by September 30,
1998. And that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the
fire and life safety code, uniform fire code, parking requirements and paving and
landscaping requirements and all ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional
use should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant by the city.
Anderson: Second.
Corrie: Motion is made and second of the decision that was read. Is there any
discussion? AU those in favor of the motion as stated?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
ITEM NO. 15: DISCUSSION WITH WALT MORROW REGARDING GENERATIONS
PLAZA BID REPORT.
Corrie: Mr. Morrow.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor and Council this is a brief committee report with respect to our
Generations Plaza project which we've been struggling with as you know for some time.
Starting last November we had a public meeting between the Parks and Recreation
Commission, the P & Z, the City Council, interested members of the public. The
decision was made by the City Council to go with the original design. We had some in
house committee estimates that indicated that probably the structural concrete and that
type of stuff would be in the 85-$90,000 range. The City Council then approved a loan
of $100,000 to this project to be off set with or repaid by virtue of donations. In the
ensuing months from January through this last Thursday, we have struggled with
several designs getting design criteria and getting it in biddable format. Debating some
other issues that came along, the end result is that on Thursday of last week we had our
bid opening. The bid opening had essentially one bid that was a qualified bidder. There
was a second bid that due to some confusion was late in submittal and was declared to
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 38
be non responsive. The one bid that was valid was in the amount of $185.300. Clearly
about a $100,000 over what we had anticipated the cost of the structural improvements
to be. At our committee meeting on Friday at noon to review essentially and in my
follow up conversations with committee members that were not at that meeting. The
committee is looking for your guidance as to which direction to go. The result of taking
the $185,300 we had further confirmation by virtue of a phone conversation with the folk
at Elsworth Kincade who didn't have their bid on time, they have since sent us
documentation of what their bid was. It was $179,161 and indicates that generally
probably the project 15 that price range, because you have two that are within $6,000 of
each other on almost $200,000. That clearly represents about a 30/0 deviation which is
well within the form of the 10%. By taking the $185,300 and adding to it the cost of
monies that have already been spent, the cost of things that need to be done to and
including the trees and the metal lettering for the beams, the plaques for the pavers, all
those types of things. It looks like that this cost would be somewhere in the
neighborhood of $238,090 at this juncture. Clearly from the committee's standpoint we
don't have a sense of direction that we can advise you as to what ought to be done.
This is tremendously over budget in comparison to what we as Mayor Corrie and former
Council had thought that we were going to spend and that we voted to approve. No one
on the committee had a sense of direction of which way they wanted to go. The feeling
was that that was a tremendous amount of tax payer money to put for a 60 by 60
project. The feeling was also that this is one of those decisions that no matter what you
decide you're going to have a difficult time supporting your decision. Kind of a darned if
you do, darned if you don't situation. So what I'm here for tonight is some guidance
from you to give to the committee as to what your wishes for us might be. Clearly it
appears to me that from a practical sense that maybe the most prudent course of action
is to reject the bid, go back to the drawing board, spend some time thinking it through
and then come to a direction that you want us to proceed. Or your other choice may
very well be that we disband the committee, look at doing something different, give
them our thanks and press on from there. So having made this presentation, Gary will
do a submittal here in terms of the formal bid process and what your desires are. We'll
await your instructions as to how you wish us to proceed. Are there any questions that I
can answer for you?
Rountree: Walt I guess in fairness to some of the members that were at the meeting I
attended and I am a member of that committee as well. There was a degree of I guess
embarrassment, but they felt strongly that if this project could advance, we need to
advance it. But they had strong feelings that they weren't clear that this may be the
best expenditure of the money. Particularly if we feel it is inflated in terms of
construction costs. So I think that Walt's portrayal of the session that I was in is correct
and there isn't any clear direction from the committee. There's mixed feelings, and I
cert~inly have mixed feelings about it for what you said, is this the best expenditure of
public funds. However weighing that against the commitment the city has made the
fund raising efforts that have gone forward if in fact we choose not to advance the
(
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 39
project, we have that to deal with and we have to put together some kind of strategy
either to move it forward or how to figure how to get back to the folks that have been
waiting for this thing for over two years.
Morrow: I think I can help you also Charlie in terms of probably the person that's been
the most involved in this project from its very beginning clear back into I believe he said
the early 90's was Terry Smith and Terry Smith was really torn. I think kind of
paraphrasing here, but his reply was as a supporter of this project from the very
beginning and a labor of love that he wanted to see it go forward. But as a tax payer he
had reservations about the commitment of that type of tax payer funds. That shows you
the dilemma. Most members of the committee that were present felt and I polled the
other members by virtue of phone conversations and they had roughly the same
feelings. So, this is something that we need your guidance on as to it is to do and I
think that I also indicated in the meeting that from my position if I was a sitting city
councilmen at that point in time, I don't know what my answer would have been. I don't
know today what it would be. Any other questions or comments?
Corrie: Walt, I don't have a question. I have a comment that I do want to thank you for
your work and the committee's work on this. I kind of feel like you do that we probably
should interject a bit as being very difficult to handle. I think that we need to pursue
something here for the city. I think that maybe we can redesign, not have columns, the
beams. Those are pretty spendy things. And perhaps look at something different that
we can do at that corner and at least do something that the people would approve of but
not near as expensive. So that's where I'm coming from. I think the city should have
something down there rather than a parking lot for across the street. So that's where
I'm coming from. I really do feel that the people of Meridian want to see something
down there. I think it doesn't have to be as grandeur as we had originally planned. We
realize now that it's too grander. It's nice, it was a good thought.
Morrow: I guess if I have a lean against it there is some common ground here. I think
that clearly as a former council and the current council we have a commitment to do
something with that corner. I think that Charlie made the point very well in Friday's
meeting that it's very difficult to budget $200 and some thousand for a project like this
when we have - we've just recently lost soccer fields at St. Luke's. It's tough to justify
no baseball fields. $200,000 buys a lot of that in a sports park at the corner of Meridian
and Ustick. On the other hand we have a commitment to go forward with something
down here. So maybe there's some middle ground that you refer to Mayor that the
project can be redesigned so that it is still attractive and still serves the function that we
had intended, but also allows us to build it for a reasonable amount of money and then
press on meeting the other needs of the community in parks and recreation area.
Bentley: Yeah, I would agree. I'm in favor of rejecting the bids and having the council
get with the architect and do a little redesign and move on from there.
(
Meridian City Counci1
September 1 t 1998
Page 40
Bird: I agree with the people. WeJre going to have to scale it back. I think we definitely
need some at that comer. I would like to see if we can keep this committee in tact if
they would like to stay servingJ let them go ahead with the redesign and see what they
can come up with. I would like to know why we only had one possibly two bids. I think I
know why being in the construction business. I think it's the wrong time. I think
everybody was pretty busy. If it had been bid out this spring, I think we would have had
more bidders.
Morrow: I think -part of the answer to that question is yes, we've had a really unusual
year with respect to weather, and in our field as you well are aware of everything is out
of sequence right now. It won't be corrected until the first snows come and we get back
on the normal work sequence. I think however the other part of that is that clearly as
our discussions were last November. That this is a structural concrete truly commercial
type of project. It is very complex. It does not lend itself to the volunteerism of the
original scope and concept of what we went to work under. Having said all that it is also
small enough that the companies that are most qualified to do this type of work aren't
going to bid the project because for example they're in involved in 8 and 9 story
buildings in downtown Boise and several other major kinds of projects and it just doesn't
fit in their scope of work. So to some degree we're in no manJs land with the design
with respect to finding qualified contractors. Now these two may be qualified. I'm not
personally familiar with either contractor, so I can't tell you what their work history is,
project size and so on and so forth.
Corrie: Any further discussion?
Morrow: WeJII await your instructions then.
Corrie: Thank you Walt.
ITEM NO. 16: WATER / SEWER / TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
Anderson: I make a motion we accept the delinquencies and turn off schedule for
9/16/98.
Rountree: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Anderson and second by Mr. Rountree to approve the
water, sewer and trash 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
September 1 J 1998
Page 41
Corrie: Mr. Sale, you're sitting out there waiting patiently. Yes, sir.
Sale: (Inaudible) I came over tonight to make an introduction to the Council. I want to
introduce Mr. Steve (Inaudible) with the District. Steve is going to be your liaison to the
District in the future. He'll try to attend as many of your meetings in the Planning and
Zoning Commission as he can. While he's been with the District about a little over nine
years, he won;t know the answers to all your questions, but he'JI find out the answers to
those questions so you'll see him in your meeting room from time to time and feel free
to call him.
Corrie: Steve, how do you spell your last name?
Sneed: S-n-e-e-d.
Corrie: Just like Sam Sneed, huh?
Sneed: Second cousin.
Corrie: And you're a tennis player too? I'm a sports fan from way back as you can tell.
Welcome Steve. We're looking forward to working with you.
Rountree: So Steve's our go to guy when we have questions for ACHD and he'll
connect us.
(Inaudible)
Rountree: And he's in your shop?
Sale: Yes, Steve has been with me for about three years. (Inaudible).
ITEM NO. 17: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
GARY SMITH: GENERATIONS PLAZA BID RESULTS.
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, I've got a copy of the bid schedule that was
submitted for the Generations Plaza and I'll pass that out to you. That's a breakdown of
the work items that were bid by the contractor that submitted the bid. Assistant City
Engineer, Brad Watson, is here this evening and Brad is infinitely familiar with the
project and can answer any question that you might have, so I'll turn the floor over to
Brad. If you have any questions, he'll be happy to field them for you.
Corrie: You didn't win the lottery did you?
Watson: No.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 42
Bentley: I don't think he would spend it on this.
Watson: I wasn't going to say that. I guess if there's any questions.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I don't have any questions~
Corrie: I think I would say to Brad that you've done an excellent job here and providing
us with the specs and everything else. I want to personally thank you and Gary and
your department for doing this. I had Walt. I thanked him before, but you guys did a lot
of work here on this and I'm really sorry that the price is so high, but I think personally
I'd like to see you go back and I think Mr. Bird said it quite well that he would like to see
something else done and maybe not such a grandeur here. With that I'll open it up for
the Council.
Bentley: Well Mr. Mayor I don't think we need to discuss it much farther than we have.
With reluctance, I'm going to make a motion that we reject the bid and return this back
to the committee. If they remain in force and see if we can't do a scale down version of
this and come up with something.
Bird: I'll second that.
Corrie: Motion made and second that as stated. Discussion?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor the only certain thing that I am about this project is rejecting the
bids. I'm still not convinced that a scale down approach is the way to go even though
that is an option to us and I don't object to that option but I believe that if we can keep
the committee active. I know some members on that committee were adamantly
opposed to going back to the public and explaining what's going on. I still feel that if we
do scale back we need to go back to the public because we sold this grandiose model
to the public to the people who donated, to the people who bought bricks. If that is
ultimately the option we select we need to factor that into the direction we go. I'm still
struggling with the expense of this small public space. I'm not sure that the scale back
version is going to provide that anchor point that the people have been involved in this
for years are expecting for downtown Meridian. I guess for that reason I guess at this
point I would not be able to cast a favorable vote to the motion, not that I disagree with
the rejection of the bid, but more that I'm uncertain at this point about my own feelings
of how we need to proceed. I would like a little more time to think about the scaling
down proposition. The possibility of moving forth with the way it is (End of Tape)
Rountree: ... a second bid possibly at some later date. Maybe this winter when it might
be more favorable. Anyway those are my comments at this point. I'm still not prepared
to make a decision on this other than to reject the bid.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 43
Bentley: If the Council would feel more comfortable I'll change the motion and give us
some time and maybe review this over in a work session or specific meeting to address
this if that would make them feel more comfortable.
Rountree: That gives me a warm feeling, but I don't know about the rest of you guys.
Bentley: I'd like to know what Ron's thoughts are.
Anderson: I guess I'm not opposed to just making the motion to reject the bid, but I've
done construction enough to know that even bidding this later in the year is not going to
cut the bid in half. We may knock a little bit off of it, but I think there has been a
commitment made to do something with that piece of land. I think it should become
obvious to everybody at this point that the plan that we had was too expensive and I
think we have budgeted money to do this. I think a lot of Charlie's concerns would
probably be eased if we got a new set of plans that people can look at, because once
they see those new sets of drawings then they've got something concrete that they can
envision.
Bentley: Don't mention concrete.
Anderson: Something solid that they could actually pin their eyes on and look here, so
at this point I could go either way on this, but I wouldn't oppose if you wanted to delay it
and think about it a little bit, but I think we need to do something and I think it should be
obvious that we need to scale back and put together a new design and say this is what
we've got to work with money wise, and fit it into this project. Otherwise we can be
sitting here a year or two years from now debating the exact same issue with nothing
over there but weeds.
Bird: Like we've already done for two years. I have no problem with just rejecting the
bid, but I've got a problem with putting in much more money over there than what we
have. I liked the idea and I was in with Bob and Glenn when we told the architect to go
forth. I'm not dreaming this to be this. Of course I also though we'd get more money
raised. I think you take out money out of one organization that's in there. We haven't
got very much money in raising our papers and stuff. I think that if I was to put out
$238,000 which it's already cost, that would put us in a four plex softball field almost out
there at that deal. I think we've got to - I have no problem looking back and scaling
down. I'm like Ron. I think you can bid it two weeks from now and if anything Tulley
Park proved to us you come back a month later and it goes up $35,000. It's not going
to come down.
Bentley: You withdraw you second?
Bird: I withdraw my second.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 44
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I'll amend my motion that we reject the bid for Generations Plaza
and give Council some time to do some reviewing on this.
Corrie: Do you want to still hold the committee together?
Bentley: I'd like to hold the committee together, yes.
Rountree: I'll second that.
Corrie: Motion made and second. Brad we've got the motion here now. Do you have
some things in mind that you could share with us in this study that we're going to be
doing some scaling that we can do? You've been with this project pretty long and
maybe you had some ideas that could help us.
Watson: Well looking through some of these bid items, the more expensive ones are
ones that are have to do with the fountain and the fountain installation at the back. As
you recall, we've already paid and have the fountain equipment, so scaling that back will
either cost a lot still or we've wasted some money on some fountain equipment. The
columns the structural work out front looking at the cost of those broken out it amounts
to maybe $50,000. So even then you're looking at $130,000 still. There would have to
be significant changes.
Corrie: Thank you. Any further discussion?
Bentley: Well the elimination of the columns in bringing the price down $130,000 I think
is a lot more palpable than $185,000. And there maybe something else we look at
doing with it too. The fountain is bought so the fountain should go in.
Watson: That $135,000 doesn't include the other $40,000 in extras that aren't included
in the actual construction contract so you would still be looking at $175-$180,000.
Bentley: Okay.
Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: Thank you very much. Okay, let's go back to the consent agenda item number
D, Land Lease Agreement with L.J. Ranches. Council I think there's a resolution that
we need to do on this one. Is that correct Bill?
Gigray: That's correct, Mr. Mayor.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 45
Corrie: You have in your packet resolution. This is in reference to land that's needed
by the waste water treatment plat that we had previously. I think it was Frank Johnson's
property. Now we have got the lease (Inaudible) for $21,000. Is there any questions in
reference to this resolution that you would like to have discussed?
Bentley: I would just ask the counselor if he's reviewed it and everything seems to be in
order.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor if I might respond to Councilman Bentley. Yes, I have and it is my
understanding that this is a historic relationship and is necessary for the operation of the
waste treatment plant so that that can continue to dispose of waste on this property and
that it is necessary to continue. We've just prepared a resolution so that the clerk could
certify the resolution and provide it to the other party on your authorization of entering
into the lease agreement.
Bentley: Thank you.
Rountree: Just a point of clarification for me. How do we go about identifying these
sites and working the agreements? Do we do it by bid or are the number of folks that
want this material pretty limited? As Bill just indicated it's a historic relationship that we
continue. Just a little history.
Smith: In the not too distant past we had been applying the bio solids to number of
acreages within I think we limited it to a five mile radius from the waste water treatment
plant, and I don't recall how many different parcels we had. But it began as ground
developed and our development, residential development moved farther out, it became
closer to the parcels that we were able to deposit the bio solids on and problems
ensued because of odors, and so a decision was made to try and get a piece of
property or several larger pieces of property to deposit or apply the bio solids to and
eliminate the search for the smaller pieces. The problems with the odors with the
neighbors and the fact that we have to monitor the soils for the different characteristics
of the bio solids in compliance with the 503 rigs through the Federal government. So
several years ago John made an agreement with I believe it was with the James family
to apply bio solids to a piece of their property in lieu of the number of smaller acreages
that we were applying to and then they followed through last year with Frank Johnson
and this year together to gain more property because of the amount of bio solids that
we're having to apply they went back and talked to the James family again. That's a
little bit of the history as to how we got from where we were to present day
requirements, the thought process for getting a large parcel of ground where we know
we're going all the time. But it was not a bid process. Previously the people that we
deposited or applied bio solids to wanted that material for the growing of their specific
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 46
crops~ And there are some restrictions as to what kind of properties that bio solid can
be applied to.
Anderson: My question is how do we determine fee then? Do they submit a fee to us
or is there a formula that we use to figure out how much we pay them then?
Smith: I can't answer that question, Councilman, I don't know. I'm not sure how that
number was arrived, how they arrived at that number. But it was approved as and I
think that the waster water superintendent presented it the last time. I just don't
remember the details as to how that was determined, but based on what was approved
previously this proposal is in proportional relationship to what was approved last year.
Anderson: Thank you.
Rountree: I have no questions.
Corrie: We'll need a number. We don't have a number right at this time.
(Inaudible)
Bird: I make a motion that we pass the resolution the City Council of the City of Meridian
authorizing the Mayor to enter into on behalf of the said municipality and agreement
entitled Land Lease Agreement between the city of Meridian, Lessee and Larry D.
James, d/b/a L.J. Ranches, Lessor.
Rountree: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bird and second by Mr. Rountree to the resolution for the
city council City of Meridian to authorize the Mayor to enter an agreement (inaudible)
and agreement (inaudible) between the City of Meridian Lessee and Larry D. James,
d/b/a L.J. Ranches, Lessor. Any further discussions? All those in favor of the motion
say aye?
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Smith: Mr. Mayor, I will get some information for you Councilman Anderson and the
rest of Council as to how these numbers were determined and I will have that just quick
as I can get it into your boxes for you.
Anderson: Thanks. That would make me feel better.
Corrie: The next one is coming off the consent agenda is item E and item F is a memo
regarding compensatory time and regarding administrative time. There's been a
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 47
request that we postpone the resolution of these two until the 15th of September in order
to discuss them with some of the department heads.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move that we table the compensatory time and the administrative
time consent agenda items E and F until September 15th.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second that we move to table the items E and F until
September the 15th meeting. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion
say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: Item G is hookup to city water by Wheel City, Inc., and Bill I believe you have
the paperwork on that one. I don't have one. I've got the paperwork, but I think it needs
a resolution; is that correct?
Gigray: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, I have the packet that you have which
is the recommendation with regards and request to hook up to city water service. I
certainly think the city has authority statutorily to do this. I think that in this particular
circumstance, the one thing you always concerned about when you were supplying
water outside of the boundaries of the city limits, you realize that your water system or
any portion thereof is not subject to the ordinance protections that you have in your
ordinances because it's beyond the city boundaries, and you want to be in a position so
you can sever connections and service in the event that conditions are not met by the
owner receiving the service and I have had experience in the past in other cities
regarding even conditions of doing this that the parcel is receiving the water service
would agree in writing to be annexed to the city at such point in time as the city shows
or felt that it was proper to do an annexation, and I don't know what the practice in the
city of Meridian has been. I apologize and I would note that I haven't had an opportunity
to discuss this matter in any detail with Gary. I certainly it's his department I'm sure
that's affected by this, but I those are the issues that should be addressed in these
matters where we would provide service outside of the city limits. It's my understanding
that the fee charged is sort of a double fee for this type of service and my proposal
would be that we craft some kind of agreement that would be entered into by parties
receiving such service outside of the city limit to try to protect as much as we can our
own system and to ensure that if we need to sever that service we can and I don't - this
is hitting Gary broad side here and I apologize for that, and I certainly would encourage
you to question him about whether or not this is something that ought to just be done,
but those are my thoughts.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 48
Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, Mr. Gigray, my associate over there in public
works, Bruce Freckleton, put together a memo that I think you have copies of, or a copy
of, that discusses this matter. In the past my department hasn't really seen a problem
with connecting a parcel of property that's adjacent to an existing city utility even
utilizing the double assessment fee as required by the ordinance. I think here there are
several issues that need to be considered. One that it is contiguous to the existing city
limit boundary on two sides. The city water line that's installed in the road fronting this
property was recently constructed by Ron Van Auker. There is also a proposal for
sanitary sewer to extend up this section of road that that project has been designed for
sometime and are currently in the process of getting easements finalized so that that
can be - so that construction can come to fruition so additionally this property at this
time would be on septic tank for sewage disposal. Another point that it would under the
county rules and regulations as far as building, construction is concerned. Building
permitting is concerned as well as development of the property itself, the site
development. It's just our feeling that it would be very appropriate to require the
annexation of the property if the agreement is approved for connection to the city water
line.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor in reading Bruce Freckleton's comments, I totally agree with what
he's saying and what Gary is saying. We've got a property that is contiguous with the
city limits. The sewer line and stuff is hopefully getting ready to get off the ground over
there. So I'd be in favor of telling Wheel City that they can have the water, but they are
going to have to be annexed.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I guess just a point of clarification. I think our policy in the past
has been on these hook ups is generally an emergency situation where we have an
existing facility or residence where their well has gone dry or they can no longer get
water or they lose their Central District Health certification in some way or another.
We've been very generous in providing them the hook ups for both sewer and water in
some cases without annexation. My sense on this is it's a new facility. I don't know of a
case where we've granted city services to a new facility because of proximity to the city
limits. We've granted use of United Water to facilities that we can't service that are in
our impact area. But there may be a remote case out there, but I guess I say that in
support of what Glenn just said is that in my opinion by the time we condition this or
work out a development agreement or some kind of agreement for this hook up we've in
effect annexed the property into the city by virtue of making them comply with
everything we want them to comply with. I'm inclined to want to encourage them to start
the annexation procedure so we can not only hook them up to city services, but
continue on our sewer system and have them fall within our ordinances for having to
pay for pay latecomer fees and those kinds of things for those facilities that are out
there.
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 49
Smith: And Mr. Mayor and Council members, the other aspe~t of that and Councilman
Rountree you brought that up is that when the sewer system is extend in Lanark Street
as part of this Eagle Road Franklin Road sewer project, if the property is within the city
limits, then they are required to connect. If they are not in the city limits, there isn't way
we can get them to connect.
Rountree: Other than the help from Central District.
Smith: Correct. So I think that would be one more point in favor of requiring the
annexation.
Corrie: Any other questions, comments?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I will move that we deny the request for hook up to city water by
the new warehouse office facility for Wheel City, Inc. 3083 Lanark.
Corrie: Okay do I hear a second?
Bentley: Second.
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree and second by Mr. Bentley to deny the Wheel
City, Inc. request for hook up to city water by Wheel City. Further discussion? All in
favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: Gentlemen I would like if you would have a very brief Executive Session here
and then we'll be finished. Would you like to do that?
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, can I do one other thing beforehand?
Corrie: What is it?
Bentley: Discussion on the franchise fee. Are we going to - we should have a
resolution drafted. Do we need to do that at the next meeting to request to draft it up?
Corrie: We can go ahead and request that without a discussion.
Bentley: Request it now?
Corrie: Pardon?
Bentley: Now or at the next meeting?
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 50
Corrie: Yeah, I can just tell the city attorney to draw up the resolution. That would be
the will of the Council.
Rountree: I guess my question is what's the resolution for?
Bentley: The resolution -
Rountree: We would be passing the ordinance.
Corrie: Yeah, that's what I was wondering. I was going to ask you -
Bentley: Okay well my question would be it was mentioned I think you mentioned it on
the dedication of the funds.
Corrie: Dedication of the funds. I see, okay.
Bentley: My preference Would those funds be dedicated to public safety, fire, and
police.
Corrie: Okay, we can -
Rountree: I guess Mr. Mayor from my point of view, that is a discussion the Council
needs to have. I don't know that maybe a resolution might be premature, but it would
facilitate the discussion. Maybe that's something we want to have on our next planning
meeting to discuss. A draft resolution at least some draft concepts about that.
Bentley: I just want to get it on the board so we keep going with it.
Corrie: Yeah, I think we can do it Charlie.
(Inaudible)
Bentley: That's all.
Gigray: Mr. Mayor if you are going to go into Executive Session my advice under the
open meeting act is that you designate the reason why you are going into Executive
Session.
Corrie: Do you have that number handy what the -
Gigray: I didn't realize we were doing this.
{
Meridian City Council
September 1 J 1998
Page 51
Corrie: I didn't either until I got to thinking.
Gigray: I think it's 6723 something. I know that much.
Bird: Yeah, it's close enough.
Gigray: I think if you state on the record the general purpose of it, the statute will
identify itself.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move under state statutes that we go into Executive Session for
personnel matters.
Bird: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second we go into Executive Session for personnel matters
according to state code. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Corrie: Okay, we're out of the Executive Session at 11:15. Do I hear a motion to come
out of the session.
Bird: Mr. Mayor, I make a motion that we come out of the Executive Session.
Rountree: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second to come out of the Executive Session. All those in
favor of the motion say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
Corrie: I'll entertain a motion to retire for the evening.
Bird: So moved.
Rountree: Second.
Corrie: Motion made and second that we retire at 11 :20. All those in favor say aye.
MOTION CARRIED: All ayes.
(
Meridian City Council
September 1, 1998
Page 52
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 :20 P.M.
(TAPE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS ON FILE)
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1,1998 -7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
ROLL CALL: X RON ANDERSON >( CHARLIE ROUNTREE
1< GLENN BENTLEY X KEITH BIRD
K MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE
CONSENT AGENDA
A. MINUTES FROM SPECIAL MEETING HELD AUGUST 6, 1998: tf(/ffrDVL
B. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS REGULAR MEETING HELD AUGUST 18, 1998: ~f;JfOVe"
C. MINUTES FROM SPECIAL MEETING HELD AUGUST 20, 1998: rLflr-ov.e.,
D. LAND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH L. J. RANCHES: t:<pprovC- ref ~"--fi'O)...)
E. MEMO REGARDING COMPENSATORY TIME: f1d;Jel (.,V,4-; 'I Jellt, /5 /!::
F. MEMO REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE TIME: -faBle ~Z Jepf-. t:3:f'A.
G. REQUEST TO HOOK UP TO CITY WATER BY WHEEL CITY, INC.: c/el'':j n2f.~.S't
H. APPROVE BILLS: af>prov~
REGULAR AGENDA
1. TABLED AUGUST 4, 1998: ORDINANCE # - ORDINANCE CHANGES
WITH CROSS CONNECTION AND BACKFLOW DEVICES: ~
2. TABLED AUGUST 18, 1998: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 4.13 ACRES BY
EAGLE PARTNERS - NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAGLE ROAD AND MAGIC
VIEW: -tab&t<.rdtr SepT-15~
3. ORDINANCE #800 - CITY OF MERIDIAN I IDAHO POWER FRANCHISE (2ND
READING): 2~ recu:(thj 6,1 -ff7~/ J'a#l/'h-CLI-,J
4. ORDINANCE #801 - THOUSAND SPRINGS/FARWEST ANNEXATION AND
ZONING: .-/zv~/e ~ 2 ~ / /f I~- reco1-d.R6t-
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
(
14.
TABLED AUGUST 18, 1998: AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH OF 1,000 FEET FOR FOUR BLOCKS AND
PIPING OF THE RIDENBAUGH CANAL BY FARWEST DEVELOPERS -
NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE:
Pl-pfJrov.e -/'I-f': t/ elL a~v.e- aec:ffi1rJ,..;
TABLED AUGUST 18,1998: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
PROPOSED THOUSAND SPRINGS SUBDIVISION BY FARWEST
DEVELOPERS AND MARTY GOLDSMITH - NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST
OF EAGLE ROAD: ~prov..e- tv;?-Iv cQn-ce,~/i~
TABLED AUGUST 18, 1998: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR A CONTRACTORS' YARD BY DONOVAN HANSON d/b/a HANSON
EXCAVATING - LOT 2, BLOCK 1 OF PLAYGROUND SUBDIVISION:
tf;/j)riJY!!.- ;;(1'- ( eft. cv;>provll- dec/J/?t'rJ
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR
VARIANCE FOR OFF-PREMISE SIGN AT S. PROGRESS AVENUE 11-84 BY
R.T. NAHAS COMPANY -INTERSTATE 84 AND EAST 1ST STREET:
~pprQrre -'c/~ felt afl}Jnve dtlC/JF'lr,..J
FINAL PLAT FOR HAVEN COVE NO.8 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY - SOUTH OF W. CHERRY LANE AND EAST OF TEN MILE ROAD:
t1-fJprov.e,
PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR MAWS
SUBDIVISION NO. 3 BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - NORTH OF EAST
PINE AND WEST_ QF ~ORTH I;..OCUST GROVE ROAD: "L)
aj/fJhJv/l.,-,CI-f tc(( r! ~j ~~f:r GUr
PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR TRANSFER OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR BRIGHT BEGINNINGS LEARNING CENTER TO LAURIE M.
ROY BY LAURIE M. ROY - 510 E WATER TOWER LANE:
pl..l;Jpve fr~.r~
PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR AN APPROVED SIGN
ADVERTISING BUSINESS ON PART OF LOT 3 BY AV II LLC - 1650 E
FAIRVIEW AVE: L'//' { ~ .
ft~de'p-c--f-<l ~p~ :Tlr elL
PUBLrt HEARING: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR TILING OF IRRIGATION
DITCHES CROSSING THE SITE BY R.C. WILLEY HOME FURNISHING - NE
CORNER EAGLE AND FRANKLIN ROADS:
t<.)dVe f-ef~Y11-~
DISCUSSION WITH WALT MORROW REGARDING BSU CONTRACT WITH
CITY AT WATER DEPARTMENT BUILDING.
Le.tfd c:t:-ef1t- ~ review
DISCUSSION WITH WALT MORROW REGARDING GENERATIONS PLAZA
BID REPORT. t
p-u.r~~-h 'fn..-.; () F C 19 ~ CH-e.e! VI ew..s
WATER I SEWER 1 TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
affrbV-~
15.
16.
17. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
GARY SMITH:
GENERATIONS PLAZA BID RESULTS.
rej~c:f t;/?ts
RESOLUTION NO /10
BY: tlzaflie f((}UYlm~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND
PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO,
ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT
ENTITLED "LAND LEASE AGREEMENT" BETWEEN THE
CITY OF MERIDIAN, LESSEE, AND LARRY D. JAMES, d/b/a
L.J. RANCHES, LESSOR.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO:
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to
enter into an agreement with LARRY D. JAMES, d/b/a L.J. RANCHES,
denoted as "LAND LEASE AGREEMENT' a copy of which is
attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons
and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR
AND CITY COUNCIL as follows:
1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into on
behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with LARRY D.
JAMES, d/b/a L.J. RANCHES, entitled "LAND LEASE
AGREEMENT" a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit
"A" to this Resolution and to bind this City to its terms and conditions.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH
CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
TO ENTER INTO A LAND LEASE AGREEMENT
1
/
I
PASSED BY 1HE COUNCIL OF 1HE CITY OF MERIDIAN,
IDAHO, this /J"t day of JejJ--R~6.ef- , 1998.
,
APPROVED BY 1HE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN,
IDAHO, this ISP day of So/te~hef- , 1998.
ATTEST:
-~
CITY CLERK
090198-FINAL
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH
CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR
TO ENTER INTO A LAND LEASE AGREEfvffiNT
2
(
LAND LEASE AGREEMENT
T~IS LEA~E, made and entered into this 1L day of ~{JI"j "'" ~f , 1998, byand between
the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and political subdivision of the State of Idaho, hereinafter
referred to as the Lessee, party of the first part, and LARRY D. JAMES, b/bla L J. RANCHES,
hereinafter referred to as the LESSOR, party of the second part,
WIT N E SSE T H:"
FOR AND IN CONSIOERA TION of the rentals hereinafter provided, and the covenants
and agreements hereinafter set forth, LESSOR hereby leases and demises to Lessee, for the
tenn herein stated, the property, described as the SE X of the NE X of Section 36, Township 4
North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County. Idaho and the S % of the NWX ofthe NE X
of Section 36, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, which shall
. be hereinafter referred to as the "leased premises" for the convenience of the parties hereto.
This agreement is subject to the following tenns and conditions to which the parties
mutually agree:
TERM: This lease agreement shall be effective from October 1, 1998 to
September 30, 1999, subject to LESSOR'S right to tenninate the tenn of this lease as herein
pelow set forth.
RENTAL: As rental for the leased premises, Lessee agrees to pay LESSOR, at the
address hereafter provided for the giving notice to LESSOR, the sum of TWENTY ONE
THOUSAND AND NO/100 for both parcels, for the tenn of this lease agreement which shall be
paid on or before October 31, 1998.
NO RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL ON SALE: In the event LESSOR decides to sell the
above described premises, it is understood and agreed that LESSOR must seil the property
subject to LESSEE'S right to use the property and it is understood that LESSOR has not granted
to LESSEE a right to purchase the property.
USE OF THE PREMISES: It is understood LESSEE may use the property to
deposit, spread, till, plow, disc, or otherwise place on, and/or into, the land and soil of the property
municipal biosolids, which are sewage refuse, and shall have the right to drive vehicles on the
land to place the biosolids on the land. It is agreed that Lessee shall have no right to use any
water or water right that may accompany the land and that Lessee shall put the land to no use
." ~\
other than herein stated. It is further agreed that the land is, and shall remain, fallow land.
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS: LESSEE shall be responsible for all
maintenance and repairs on the premises associated with the intended use of th~ property.
EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 17tO
OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
EXPENSES AND UTILITIES: LESSEE shall paY.any and all expenses of any nature
accruing by reason of Lessee's use and occupancy of the leased premises, except that LESSOR
shall pay all real property and/or taxes or assessments that are billed to of for the property.
DESTRUCTION OR DAMAGE: LESSOR shall have the total risk of loss or damage to
t~e leased permises.
EMINENT DOMAIN: In the event that any governmental entity, other than Lessee,
shall take the premises by use of eminent domain, the LESSOR shall receive the value of the
land.
INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY: LESSEE agrees t~at he will, and he does
hereby, indemnify and save LESSOR harmless from all claims, judgements, demands and liability
of any person or parties whatsoever resulting from any occurrence, injury or accident which takes
place during the term of this lease agreement on or about the premises. Lessee shall obtain
liability, premises and on-premises medical insurance insuring lessee with LESSOR named as
" an additional insured on the premises and any buildings located ther.eon, such policy or policies
of insurance shall have a minimum limit of $500,000.00 or such other amount as LESSOR shall
designate. Lessee shall furnish copies of all insurance policies to LESSOR and all renewals
thereof, and shall keep all such policies in a current status.
TERMINATION OF TERM: As stated above in the paragraph TERM, LESSOR may
terminate the term of this lease if Lessee violates any of the terms of this Lease; if the term of the
lease is terminated for the reason herein stated, LESSOR shall refund to Lessee that portion of
the lease payment for the year, on a pro rata basis, for the time p~riod that Lessee was unable to
use the property.
TERMINATION UPON DEFAULT: In the event of default ofthis lease agreement
the LESSOR shall give written notice of such default to the Lessee by postage. prepaid, certified
mail. If the Lessee's violation of the lease shall continue for thirty (30) d<:iys, the lease may at
once" be terminated by a second notice to the Lessee by postage prepaid certified mail that the
lease is terminated: This lease shall terminate as follows:
a)
b)
At the expiration of the tenn provided herein;
Upon determination of the LESSOR that the Lessee has failed to
observe any of the conditions, exceptions or reservations or to fulfill any
of the provisions set out in this agreement;
By the mutual agreement of the parties hereto.
~\
c)
LEASE AGREEMENT " CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES
Page - 2
EXlllBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. /7,0
OF TIIE CITY OF lvIERIDIAN
OTHER MATIERS:
- a. Nothing herein co~~ained shall be construed to create the relationship of
partners, joint ventures, or parties to any jOint enterprise in any manner between
LESSOR and lessee. "
b. In construing this Lease, the singular shall include the plural, and the neuter
gender shall include the masculine and feminine, all as the context may require.
c. In the event either party is required to institute any legal action in order to enforce
any of the rights, agreements, covenants or conditions herein contained, the
prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to recover such party's
reasonable attorney fees from the other party, together with costs of suit, the
amounts thereof to be fixed by the Court in such legal action.
d. The forbearance or failure of any party hereunder to give prompt notice of default
or termination of this Lease by reason of any act, omission or occurrence, or to
strictly enforce any covenant hereof, shall not be deemed a waiver of any of the
provisions of this lease agreement as regards any other or further such default or
breach, act, omission or occurrence, nor shall consent or approval of LESSOR
given in one instance be construed to waive the necessity for such consent or
approval" as regards any other or further similar act by Lessee, unless such
i~tention be expressly stated in writing by LESSOR.
e. In the event any clause or provision of this Lease is declared by any Court to be
invalid or unenforceable for any reason, such invalid or unenforceable clause or
provision shall not affect the whole of this instrument, but the balance of the
provisions hereof shall remain in full force an effect
f. All of the provisions hereof shall ensure to the benefit of and shall be binding
upon, the heirs, executors, administrators, personal representatives, successors
and assigns of all parties.
NOTICES: All notices hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed
given when personally delivered to the party, an employee or managing agent in charge
of the receiving party's business premises at the time of selVice thereof, or when
deposited in the United States mail, postage fully prepaid, by certified mail, addressed to
such other party as follows:
NOTICE TO LESSEE: William G. Bergt Jr.
CITY CLERK
33 E. Idaho
Meridiant Idaho 83642
" LEASE AGREEMENT OCITYOOF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES
EXlllBIT "A" TO RESOLUTI )N N( . .
OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN 1'70 .
'\
Page - 3
(
NOTICE TO LESSOR:
LARRY D. JAMES
2165 Dixie Creek Road.
Cambridge, Idaho 83610
QUIET ENJOYMENT BY LESSEE: Upon performing all of its duties and
obligations hereunder in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Lease, Lessee
shall be entitled to quietly and peaceably have, hold, occupy, possess, and enjoy the
leased premises during the term hereof, without hindrance or ejection by persons lawfully
claiming under LESSOR.
ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLEASE: Neitherthis lease agreement, nor any
interest in the leased premises may be assigned or in any manner transferred by Lessee,
without the prior approval of LESSOR expressed in writing.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this lease agreement has been duly executed by the
representative parties, the day and year first above written.
LESSOR: .
CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and
political subdivision of the
ATTEST:
By
Robert D. Come, Mayor .
WirJiam G. Berg, Jr., City Crerk
Approved by the City Council August ,1998.
LESSEE:
. LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES
EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. .
OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN (1 t/
Page - 4
STATE OF IDAHO, )
: SSe
County of Ada, )
On this - day of September, 1998, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and
for said State, personally appeared Robert D. Corrie, Mayor, and William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk,
respectively, of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and political subdivision of the State of
Idaho, known to me to be the entity that granted the authority to the said individuals to subscribe
their names to the within and foregoing. instrument in their capacity as Mayor and City Clerk, and
acknowledged to me that they executed the same in the name of the CITY OF MERIDIAN.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the
day and year in this ~rtificate first above written.
(SEAL)
NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO
Residing at Meridian, Idaho
Notary expires on:
STATE OF IDAHO, )
tj;st'Nflo,.i ss.
County of..Ae&,- (1) Ai.{ r? .. . . .
On thiS~ day of SP,r>4~, 1998, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public In
and for said State, personally appeared Larry D. James, known to me to be the ,person who
subscribed his m.:me to the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the
day and year in this certificate first above written..
NOTARY PUBL~C FOR :~7~~ A""' //
Residing at d~~ ;../.4"
Notary expires: jb',. / ~ -:2 O<J..)-
(SEAl.)
LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES
EXIllBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. /7,{)
OF TIIE CITY OF ~RIDIAN
Page - 5
CERTIFICATE OF CLERK
OF
THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
:RECEIVED
SEP 0 1 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify:
1. That I am the duly appointed and elected Clerk of the City of
Meridian, a duly incorporated City operating under the laws of the State of Idaho,
with its principal office at 33 East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho.
2. That as the City Clerk of this City, I am the custodian of its records
and minutes and do hereby certify that on the / $7 day of September, 1998,
the following action has been taken and authorized:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND
PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO,
ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, AN AGREEMENT
ENTITLED "LAND LEASE AGREEMENT" BETWEEN THE
CITY OF MERIDIAN, LESSEE, AND LARRY D. JAMES, d/b/a
L.J. RANCHES, LESSOR.
BE IT RESOLVED BY TIlE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MERIDIAN; IDAHO:
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City of Meridian to
enter into an agreement with LARRY D. JAMES, d/b/a L.J. RANCHES,
denoted as "LAND LEASE AGREEMENT" a copy of which is
attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, the reasons
and authority for which are as set forth in said Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR
AND CITY COUNCIL as follows:
CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE
CITY OF MERIDIAN
1
1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into on
behalf of the City of Meridian that certain agreement with LARRY D.
JAMES, d/b/a L.J. RANCHES, entitled "LAND LEASE
AGREEMENT' and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. ",,"mUff,
-.J." II"
,\.~..J '* ~'1'~~
~~' ~
. _ Iv~~ \
;: SEAL \
STATE OF IDAHO, ) - ~ ,r,:
~ ~ {$'J ~
: 58. ~ ~ " '.0 ~
~ ~ ,. ls-t · ~.$
1 ~""" ~ ~ tIt"\." ,$
""1 ~ ""
1 ~ .~
/\ On t is day of September, in the year 1998, before me, II'IIIHI nIU\\\\\
;4h M-S , a Notary Public, appeared
WIILLI G. BERG, JR., known or identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of
Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian.
~ 'f~
Notary PU~ ~h~ / /
Commission Expires: ) 0 J S ~O.d
County of Ada,
.."."UI'."..
t.'. L'- .'..
(SEALt~~'~c.~L · 8.tA~#'##;
~~ "~ ......... '~I\ ~
~ ~.. e. v- ~
$.- .. \
: :....'\. aT A.R L." :.
.. .):' -r - .
. . . .
: * : ....... : * 5
.." C..
- . . -
~ e. PUB\...\ .. ~
~~. . ~
~ ..?> e.. ...A.~O ~
~# ~:r ........ ~"T ~ft;
"##~" 11 OF \~ ~...~~..
I"..J....,"'~
CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE
CITY OF MERIDIAN
2
(
R~CEIVED
AUG 2 8 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
APPLICATION OF FARWEST DEVELOPERS AND MARTY GOLDE
FOR A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH OF 1000 FEET AND
A VARIANCE FROM PIPING THE RIDENBAUGH CANAL
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled variance request having come on for
consideration on August 4, 1998, at approximately 7: 30 0 I clock
p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho
Street, Meridian, Idaho, and the Ci ty Council having heard and
taken oral and written testimony, the City Council of the City of
Meridian makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1 . That notice of the public hearing on the variance was
published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing
for August 4, 1998 the first publication of which was fifteen (15)
days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at
the August 4, 1998, hearing; that copies of all notices were
available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
2. That notice of public hearing is required to be sent to
property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the
land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E., 11-2-419 D. I and
11-9-612 B. l.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the
City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met.
3. That the property is currently in Ada County however a
request for annexation and zoning is presently being considered by
the Meridian City Council.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
(
4. That the property is zoned Rural Transition with a
proposal pending for an R-4 designation.
5 . That. the applicant has requested that he be granted a
variance from the requirement that all street blocks do not
exceed 1000 feet and that the applicant shall pipe the Ridenbaugh
canal.
6 . The entire property in question is described in the
application and is incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
7. That at the public hearing, the Applicant's
representative testified that proposed Thousand Springs
development has 4 blocks that exceed the maximum block length of
1000 feet per Meridian City Ordinance. She also noted that she
would like a variance from having to pipe the Ridenbaugh canal.
7. That the City Engineer, Planning and Zoning
Administrator did not submit comments. Nampa Meridian Irrigation
had no comment on the project.
8. There was no other testimony at the hearing.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local
Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant IS
property.
2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant
to Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
Section 11-9-612 of the Development Ordinances.
3 . That the City Council has judged this application by
the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the
Subdivision and Development Ordinance and upon the record
submitted to it and the things upon which it may take judicial
notice.
4. That the Council may take judicial notice of its own
proceedings,
those of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual
conditions existing within the City and the State.
5. That the following provision of Section 11-9-612
A. I., of the' Subdivision and Development Ordinance is noted
which is pertinent to the Application:
11-9-612 A. 1. PURPOSE
The Council, as a resul t of unique circumstances (such as
topographic physical limitations or a planned unit
development), may grant variances from the provisions of this
Ordinance on a finding that undue hardship results from the
strict compliance with specific provisions or requirements of
the Ordinance or that application of such provision or
requirement is impracticable.
7. That the specific requirements regarding a variance
that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are as
follows:
No variance shall be favorably acted upon by the Council
unless there is a finding, as a result of a public hearing,
that all of the following exist:
a. That there are such special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application of
the provisions of this Ordinance would clearly be
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
(
impracticable or unreasonable; in such cases, the
subdivider shall first state his reasons in writing as
to the specific provision or requirement involved;
b. That the strict compliance with the requirements of
this Ordinance would resul t in extraordinary hardship
to the subdivider because of unusual topography, other
physical conditions or other such conditions which are
not self-inflicted, or that these conditions would
result in inhibiting the achievement of the objectives
of this Ordinance;
c. That the granting of the specified variance will not be
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the area in which the property is situated;
d. That such variance will not violate the provisions of
the Idaho Code; and
e. That such variance will not have the effect of
nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance
and the Comprehensive Plan.
9. That"regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2. it is specifically
concluded as follows:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application
of the provisions of the block length Ordinance
and the piping requirement would clearly be
unreasonable.
b. That strict compliance wi th the requirements of
the block length and piping Ordinances would
result in extraordinary hardship to the applicant.
c . That the granting of the variances would not be
detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious
to other property in the area in which the
property is situated.
d. That the granting of the variances would not
violate the provisions of the Idaho Code.
e. That the variances would not have the effect of
altering the interests and purposes of this
Ordinance or the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
10. That it is concluded that the Application for variance
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
(
from the block length and piping ordinances of the Subdivision and
Development Ordinance should be granted.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
(
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby approve
these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN BIRD
VOTED ~U-
VOTED ~P.A.....
VOTED~
VOTED ~e~
VOTED
COUNCILMAN ANDERSON
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER)
DECISION
That it. is decided the variance for the block length and
piping of the Ridenbaugh canal is hereby granted.
APPROVED:~
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6
(
(
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
DONOVAN HANSON D/B/A HANSON EXCAVATING
("!QNDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CONTRACTORS YARD
~p~Z-
=r-\~~~~ d-
~-))-qr
LOT 2, BLOCK 1, PLAYGROUND SUBDIVISION
1 780 E. OVERLAND ROAD
:MERIDIAN, IDAHO
ItBOEIVED
AUG 0 1 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearings
on June 17, 1998 and July 14, 1998, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock
p.m., the Applicant, Donovan Hanson, appearing, the Planning and
Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered
the evidence and the matter makes the following Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. A notice of a public hearings on the application for the
conditional use permit was published for two (2) consecutive weeks
prior to said public hearings scheduled on June 17, 1998 and July
14, 1998, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days
prior to said hearings; that the matter was duly considered at the
June 17, 1998 and July 14, 1998, hearings; that the public was
given full opportunity to express comments and submit evidence; and
that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and
television stations.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 1
2. The property is located within the City of Meridian the
address is listed in the application as Lot 2, Block 1,
Playground Subdivision, 1780 E. Overland Road. The property is
described in the application for a conditional use permit, which
description is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The
Applicant is not the owner of record of the property; the record
owner of the property is D. Michael Clarke and Sue Clarke,
husband and wife. The owner has submitted a consent to this
application.
3. Pursuant to the application, the property is presently
zoned as (C-G), General Retail and Service Commercial. The
proposed use of the property is to construct a contracting yard.
The Applicant presented a site plan depicting the location of the
proposed use.
Further, pursuant to the application, the
Applicant agrees to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees
or charges, if any, associated with the lise, whether that use be
residential, commercial or industrial.
4. Donovan Hanson was sworn in by the Assistant City
Attorney. Mr. Donovan noted that they have applied for a
conditional use permit for a contractors yard. He would have
eight trucks, eight pieces of equipment and eight trailers. Mr.
Hanson noted that he may be considering this as a permanent
location.
Commissioner De Weerd noted that she felt this was not the
most appropriate place for this from an aesthetics point of view.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 2
(-
She felt that since it is visible from all directions and along
a major corridor into Meridian, the use is not compatible.
In addressing Commissioners questions, Mr. Hanson noted that
the front would be paved and the back of the property gravel and
the gate would be a single gated entrance.
Becky Bowcutt was sworn in by the Assistant City Attorney.
Mrs. Bowcutt noted that just south of the proposed development
there are plans for a new high school. She felt that the
contractors yard would not be compatible with a new high school.
Craig Groves was sworn in by the Assistant City Attorney.
Mr. Groves inquired whether the proposed project would effect the
planned sewer extension. Mr. Freckleton noted that since the
Applicant is not looking for any structures to be placed on the
property, the sewer is not an issue. Mr. Groves felt that a
contractors yard was not the best long-term use of the property.
Michael Clarke was sworn in by the Assistant City Attorney.
Mr. Clarke noted that he was not prepared to develop the
property at this time and felt Mr. Hanson would do a good job of
maintaining the property. Commissioner Borup inquired about the
use of landscaping. Mr. Clarke stated "So they want us to put a
hill in front of the property?" The Commissioner s went on to
note that landscaping would be needed in front of the project.
Commissioner De Weerd inquired about the permanency of the
project. Mr. Clark noted that he did not have a problem with the
permanency of the contractors yard. Commissioner De Weerd noted
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 3
(
her displeasure with a permanent contractors yard in that
location. Commissioner De Weerd noted that she had not seen any
landscaping plans, fencing plans, or anything that could provide
her with a vision of what the area would look like.
The Commission then had a lengthy discussion about some of
the items that were not adequately addressed. These items
included landscaping, fencing, irrigation, and term of use. The
Commission continued the public hearing to allow the Applicant to
address some of the above issues and present a revised plan to
the Planning and Zoning Commission.
5. The public hearing was continued to July 14, 1998, and
the following testimony was given at that hearing.
Donovan Hanson was sworn in by the Assistant City Attorney.
Mr. Hanson noted that he would put an 8 foot fence with slats
across the center of the yard, a six foot fence around the side
perimeter, and he would match the neighbors landscaping. (The
neighbor is CESCO.)
6. Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, and
Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer submitted
comments, which respective comments are as follows.
1. Sanitary sewer and water to this site would be via
existing mains service lines. The City of Meridian owns
and maintains an existing 12" diameter water main along
the southerly frontage of the property. A private sewer
main extends into the subject site, and at this time
provides service to the CESCO property adjacent to the
east. This application has been reviewed under the
assumption that no structures, or sewer /water services
will be needed on the site.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 4
(
2. No buildings, except for an electrical distribution
house, are shown as part of this application and, as
such, none are approved with this application.
3 . All signage shall be in accordance wi th the standards
set forth in Section 11-2-415 of the City of Meridian
Zoning and Development Ordinance. All signage shall
receive design approval of the Planning & Zoning
Department and should be professionally made. A-frame
and other temporary signs will not be permitted and will
be removed upon 3 days notice to the Applicant. Sign
permits are needed for all signage.
4 . Screened trash enclosures are to be provided in
accordance with City Ordinance. Coordinate dumpster
site locations wi th the Ci ty' s solid waste contractor,
Sanitary Services, Inc. Locate dumpste.rs so as not to
impede fire access.
5 . This conditional use permit shall be subj ect to review
upon ten (10) days notice to the applicant. An approval
of transfer will be required for any new owners/tenant.
6. Provide security lighting plans, if any, to the Meridian
Public Works Department for approval.
7. This site is located on a platted lot in The Playground
Subdivision. Overland Road is designated as an entrance
corridor in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. A
condition of annexation, and of the plat, requires a
minimum 35-foot-wide landscaped setback beyond required
right-of-way. The Applicant shall submit detailed
landscape plans for approval prior to occupying the
site.
8. All outdoor storage of equipment and materials shall be
screened from view.
9. Contractors yard shall be located a minimum distance of
three hundred feet (300') from any residence except for
an owner's residence.
10.
The contractors
maintenance and
work. There
commercial uses.
yard will
processing
shall be
be limited to storage,
incidental to contracting
no general industrial or
7. The Meridian Fire Chief, Kenny Bowers, submitted the
following comments. He is requiring that all codes be met.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 5
(
(
8. The Meridian Chief of Police, Bill Gordon, had no
comments.
9. The Central District Health Department had no objections
to this proposal.
10. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District's Hunter
Lateral courses along the west boundary of the project. The right-
of-way of the Hunter Lateral is 40 feet; 20 feet from the center
each way.
See Idaho Code 42-1208 RIGHTS-OF-WAY NOT SUBJECT TO
ADVERSE POSSESSION. The developer must contact John P. Anderson or
Bill Henson for approval before any encroachment or change of
right-af-way occurs.
They are also requiring that a Land Use
Change/Site Development application be filed for review prior to
final platting. All laterals and wasteways must be protected. All
municipal surface drainage must be retained on site.
If any
surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation
District must review drainage plans.
The developer must comply
with Idaho Code 31-3805.
It is recommended that irrigation water
be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian
Irrigation District.
11. There was no further testimony given at the hearing.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning
Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have been met,
including the mailing of notice to owners of property within 300
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 6
(
(
feet of the external boundaries of the property.
2. The City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional
uses pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to 11-2-
418 of the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of
Meridian.
3. The Ci ty has the authori ty to take judicial notice of
its own ordinances, other governmental statutes and ordinances, and
of actual conditions existing within the City and the State.
4. The property is zoned (C-G) General Retail and Service
Commercial. The (C-G), General Retail and Service Commercial is
described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B 11 as follows:
(C-G) General Retail and Service Commercial- The purpose of
the (CG) 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 City of Meridian, and
shall not consti tute strip commercial development and
encourage clustering of commercial development.
6 . Conditional Use Permit is defined in the Zoning And
Development Ordinance, City of Meridian, Idaho as "Permits allowing
an exception to the uses authorized by this Ordinance in a zoning
district."
7 . The City of Meridian has authority to place conditions
on a conditional use permit and the use of the property pursuant to
Idaho Code Section 67-6512 and pursuant to that section conditions
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 7
minimizing the adverse impact on other development, controlling the
duration of development, assuring the development is maintained
properly, and on-site or off-site facilities may be attached to the
permit; that 11-2-418 (D) authorizes the City to prescribe a set
time period for which a conditional use may be in existence.
8. Section 11-2-418 D. states as follows:
In approving any Conditional Use, the Commission and
Council may prescribe appropriate conditions, bonds, and
safeguards in conformity with this Ordinance.
Violations of such conditions, bonds or safeguards, when
made a part of the terms under which the Conditional Use
is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the Ordinance
and grounds to revoke the Conditional Use. The
Commission and Council may prescribe a set time period
for which a Conditional Use may be in existence.
9. This Application for a conditional use has been judged
upon the basis of guidelines contained in Section 11-2-418 of the
Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian and upon
the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67, Chapter 65,
Idaho Code, the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and the
record submitted to it and the things of which it may take judicial
notice.
10. Section 11-2-418 C of the Zoning and Development
Ordinance of the City of Meridian sets forth the standards under
which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council shall
review applications for Conditional Use Permits.
Upon a review of
those requirements and a review of the facts presented and the
conditions of the area, assuming that the above conditions or
similar ones thereto would be attached to the conditional use, the
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 8
(-
Planning and Zoning Commission concludes as follows:
a. The use, would in fact, constitute a conditional
use and a conditional use permit would be required
by ordinance;
b. The use would be harmonious with and in accordance
with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance;
c. The use is designed and is to be constructed to be
harmonious in appearance with the character of the
general vicinity; that if the conditions set forth
herein are complied with the use should be operated
and maintained to be harmonious wi th the intended
character of the general vicinity and should not
change the essential character of the area;
d.
The use
existing
Applicant
berming;
will not be
or future
provides
hazardous or
neighboring
and maintains
disturbing to
uses if the
the required
e. Sewer and water service is available, but the
Applicant may have to pay additional fees for the
use;
f. The use will not create excessive additional
requirements at public cost for public facilities
and services and will not be detrimental to the
economic welfare of the community;
g. The use will not involve activity, process,
material, equipment or conditions of operation that
would be detrimental to person, property or the
general welfare by reason of excessive production
of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors;
h. The use will have vehicular approaches to the
property which shall be so designed as not to
create an interference with traffic on surrounding
public streets; and
i. The development of the property will not result in
the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or
scenic feature of major importance.
It is recommended that the conditional use permit be granted
in this case for the above reasons.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 9
(
11. Conditions may be placed upon the granting of a
conditional use permit if it is determined that the permit should
be issued, to minimize adverse impact on other development. It is
recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission that the
following conditions of granting the conditional use are required,
if a permit is issued, to wit:
a.
The condi tional
Ordinance, shall
owner or lessor
another property;
use, pursuant to the Zoning
not be transferable to another
of the subject property or to
b. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the
City Engineer's office, the Planning and Zoning
Administrator, Meridian Fire Department, Meridian
Police Department, Meridian Sewer Department,
Central District Health Department and Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District and other governmental
agencies submitting comments;
c. The conditional use shall not be restricted to a
period of authorization but may be reviewed
annually, upon notice to the Applicant, for
violation of any conditions imposed herein and
other conditional use applications;
d. All ordinances of the City of Meridian must be met,
including but not limited to, the Uniform Building
Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, the
Fire and Life Safety Codes, all parking and
landscaping requirements;
e. Handicap parking, associated signage and building
construction shall meet the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
f. All signs must meet the requirements of the Uniform
Sign Code and the Meridian City Ordinance, in
addition, flashing signs and temporary signs will
not be permitted. All signs are subject to review.
In addition to theMeridian Sign Ordinance, all
signage of any type must be approved by the
Meridian City Council. Sign permits are to be
obtained prior to construction. Upon three days
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 10
(
notice to any tenant, the City of Meridian will
remove any unauthorized signage.
g. Applicant will provide a screened trash enclosure
per City Ordinance Section 11-2-414.A.3. The
applicant shall coordinate dumpster site locations
with the City's solid waste contractor, Sanitary
Services, Inc., locating dumpsters so as not to
impede fire access.
h. All driveway and parking areas shall be paved, with
all driveway accesses approved by the Ada County
Highway District. Graveled driveways, parking and
access are unacceptable. 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. All driveway and parking
stall dimensions shall comply with Meridian City
Ordinance.
i. Assessment fees for water and sewer service are
determined during the building plan review process.
Applicant shall be required to comply. wi th
pretreatment requirements as determined by the
Meridian Wastewater Department, and enter into an
Assessment Agreement with the City of Meridian.
j . The Applicant shall provide parking lot lighting
plans to the Meridian Public Works Department.
Illumination of the site shall be designed to not
cause glare or adversely impact neighboring
residential properties or the traveling public, as
determined by the City of Meridian.
Further, the Applicant shall submit lighting plans
specifically for the Chevron Station. Prior
approval of those plans shall be a condi tioD to
granting the conditional use permit.
k. Significant changes from the site plan approved
under this conditional use permit, as determined by
the Planning and Zoning Administrator, will require
re-noticing and rehearing before the Planning and
Zoning Commission and Council.
1. It shall be a condition of the conditional use
permit that the Applicant enter into a Development
Agreement with the City of Meridian. The
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 11
conditional use permit shall not be granted or
become effective until the Development Agreement is
executed and recorded.
12. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and
the Applicant shall meet these conditions.
13. It is recommended that if the Applicant meets the
conditions stated above that the conditional use permit be granted
to the Applicant.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 12
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and
approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends
to the City Council of the City of Meridian that it approve the
Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the property
described in the Application with the conditions set forth in the
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or similar condi tions as
found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the
property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the
Fire
and Life
Safety Codes,
Uniform Fire Code,
parking
requirements, and the paving and landscaping requirements, and all
Ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional use should be
subject to review upon notice to the Applicant by the City.
APPROVED:
8-7-98 -- Final
DISAPPROVED:
MOTION:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -
DONOVAN HANSON - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (C-G)
FOR A CONTRACTOR'S YARD
Page 13
(
(
APPROVAL.OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLU~IONS
The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and
I $Q day of PA~ Vl_ ~/J A, , 1998.
Conclusions of Law on this (' cI.f:/I//~ ,vv~v
I
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMAN BIRD
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE
COUNCILMAN ANDERSON
VOTED (giU<
VOTED ~
VOTED~
VOTED ~
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER)
VOTED
(INITIAL) ~
APPROVED
DISAPPROVED
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW _ (! k j/
-//' ~tJV~;/eunJCrn.;> --' COYJ-frac/f-ur& j/CVl-cL-
R.T. NAHAS COMPANY
RECEIVED
AUG 2 8 1998
CITY OF MERIDIAN
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
FOR A VARIANCE FOR AN OFF PREMISE SIGN AT PROGRESS & I-84
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled variance request having come on for
consideration on August 18, 1998, at approximately 7: 30 0 I clock
p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho
Street, Meridian, Idaho I and the Ci ty Council having heard and
taken oral and written testimonYI the City Council of the City of
Meridian makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of the public hearing on the variance was
published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing
for August 18 I 1998 the first publication of which was fifteen
(15) days prior to said
hearing; that the matter was duly
18,1998 I hearing; that copies of all
considered at the August
notices were available
to newspaper,
radio and television
stations.
2. That notice of public hearing is required to be sent to
property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the
land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E., 11-2-419 D., and
11-9-612 B. I.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the
City of Meridian; that this requirement has been met.
3. That the property is zoned C-G (General Retail and
Service Commercial) .
4. That
the Applicant IS
application
s.tates
that
the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
Applicant is proposing a single sign identifying all the tenants
on one sign as opposed to separate freestanding signs for each
tenant. The sign would be located on the south end of the property
in the common area.
5 . The entire property in question is described in the
application and is incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
6. That at the public hearing, the Applicant's
representative testified that they would like to put up a single
sign for the whole development as opposed to individual signs on
each separate parcel.
7. That the
City
Engineer,
Planning and Zoning
Nampa Meridian Irrigation
Administrator did not submit
comments.
had no comment on the project.
8. There was no other testimony at the hearing.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local
Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's
property.
2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant
to Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to
Section 11-9-612 of the Development Ordinances.
3 . That the City Council has judged this application by
the guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
Subdivision and Development Ordinance and upon the record
submitted to it and the things upon which it may take judicial
notice.
4. That the Council may take judicial notice of its own
proceedings,
those of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual
conditions existing within the City and the State.
5. That Section 2-415 C 6 notes that off premise signs are
expressly prohibited.
6. That the following provision of Section 11-9-612
A. 1., of the'Subdivision and Development Ordinance is noted
which is pertinent to the Application:
11-9-612 A. 1. PURPOSE
The Council, as a result of unique circumstances (such as
topographic physical limitations or a planned unit
development), may grant variances from the provisions of this
Ordinance on a finding that undue hardship results from the
strict compliance with specific provisions or requirements of
the Ordinance or that application of such provision or
requirement is impracticable.
7. That the specific requirements regarding a variance
that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are as
follows:
No variance shall be favorably acted upon by the Council
unless there is a finding, as a result of a public hearing,
that all of the following exist:
a. That there are such special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application of
the provisions of this Ordinance would clearly be
impracticable or unreasonable; in such cases, the
subdivider shall first state his reasons in writing as
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
to the specific provision or requirement involvedj
b. That the strict compliance with the requirements of
this Ordinance would resul t in extraordinary hardship
to the subdivider because of unusual topography, other
physical conditions or other such conditions which are
not self-inflicted, or that these conditions would
result in inhibiting the achievement of the objectives
of this Ordinancej
c. That the granting of the specified variance will not be
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the area in which the property is situatedj
d. That such variance will not violate the provisions of
the Idaho Codej and
e. That such variance will not have the effect of
nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance
and the Comprehensive Plan.
9. That.regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2. it is specifically
concluded as follows:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application
of the provisions of the sign Ordinance would
clearly be unreasonable since requiring a sign for
each business as opposed to one sign would be
onerous.
b.
That strict compliance with the
the sign Ordinance would resul t
hardship to the applicant.
requirements of
in extraordinary
c . That the granting of the variance would not be
detrimental to the public I s welfare or injurious
to other property in the area in which the
property is situated.
d. That the granting of the variance would not
violate the provisions of the Idaho Code.
e. That the variance would not have the effect of
altering the interests and purposes of this
Ordinance or the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
10. That it is concluded that the Application for variance
from Section 2-415 C 6 of the Subdivision and Development
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
Ordinance on sign requirements should be granted.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby approve
these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN BIRD
VOTED ~
VOTED ~
VOTED~
VOTED~
VOTED
COUNCILMAN ANDERSON
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER)
DECISION
That it is decided the variance for the off premise sign 1S
hereby granted.
APPROVED :~
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 6
(
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN PLANNING AND ZONING COl\1MISSION
MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
BY TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING,
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
NORTH OF PINE AVENUE AND WEST OF NORTH LOCUST GROVE ROAD
RECEIVED ..!
J U N ~ 8 1998
. CITY OF lVlERIDIAN
MERIDIAN, IDAHO
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled matter having come on for public hearing on May 12, 1998, at the hour
of 7:00 o'clock p.m., the Applicant, appearing through its representative, Richard Pavelek, the
Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Meridian having duly considered the evidence and
the matter makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. A notice of a public hearing on the application for the conditional use permit was
published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to said public hearing scheduled on May 12, 1998,
the frrst publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly
considered at the May 12, 1998 hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express
comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio
and television stations.
2. The property is located within the City of Meridian at the North of East Pine and
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
West of Locust Grove. The property is described in the application for a conditional use permit,
which description is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. The Applicant is the owner of record
of the property.
3. Pursuant to the application, the property is presently zoned as R-8, Medium Density
Residential District. The proposed use of the property is to decrease the size of house square
footage minimum requirement to 1209 from 1300 square feet, and to decrease frontage requirement
from 50 feet to 45 feet per lot, and to construct seven (7) townhouse units, and two single-family
units. The Applicant presented a site plan depicting the location of the proposed use. Pursuant to
the application, the Applicant agrees to pay any additional sewer, water or trash fees or charges,
associated with the use, whether that use be residential, commercial or industrial.
4. That the R-8 District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 4., as
follows:
(R-8) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose of the
(R-8) District is to permit the establislnnent of single- and two-family dwellings at a
density not exceeding eight (8) dwelling units per acre. This district delineates
those areas where such development has or is likely to occur in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan of the City and is also designed to permit the conversion of
large homes into two-family dwellings in well-established neighborhoods of
comparable land use. Connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the
City of Meridian is required.
5. That the planned residential development of 7 townhouse units and 2 single-family
units in a district ofR-8 Medium Density Residential, as proposed by the Applicant, is an allowed
conditional use in the R-8 District.
6. That the subject property is presently vacant.
7. That sewer and water is available to the property and is required.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
(
8. Richard Pavelek was sworn in by the Assistant City Attorney. Mr. Pavelek noted
that it is the developers desire to build a townhouse style unit, with each unit being self-owned.
He noted that the units would be 1209 square feet and likewise the lot width would be 45 feet.
He noted that the street frontage widths are less than the requirement under the ordinance. He
noted that the developer also understands the square footage is less than the requirement but asks
the Conunission to consider the project as a townhouse style project. He noted the density is
within the requirements in Meridian's ordinance. He noted that he would like to discuss staff
conunents, specifically item #5. He noted that the only way to build the project is through the
PUD process. One of the requirements is the open space requirement. He noted that the current
project is deficient in the open space requirement. Mr. Pavelek noted that the developer could
add two more townhouses and decrease the size of the other two open lots. His preference,
however, is to approve the plan as submitted. He noted item #6 which requires 5 more feet for a
set back. They will redesign the unit to pick that up. Item #7 notes that a variance from City
Ordinance would need to be granted because pressurized irrigation does not seem to be proposed.
Mr. Pavelek noted that he would talk to the developer about the irrigation issue. Item #8 talked
about single family units. Mr. Pavelek presumes that these townhouses would meet that
standard.
Commissioner Johnson inquired how a townhouse meets the defmition of a single family
detached dwelling unit. Mr. Pavelek noted that his definition of a single family is that each
family owns a separate unit. Furthermore, he noted that the property line runs through the
building.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
Commissioner Johnson inquired about specific site comment #7 pertaining to irrigation
rights. He inquired whether there were any bills from Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. Mr.
Pavelek noted that there were not and he presumes that Maw's Subdivision One and Two were
also excluded by application.
9. Commissioner MacCoy noted that he had a difficult time accepting this project
because of the square footage of the buildings and the property. He noted that he does not like
the thought of townhouses because of the potential of turning it into a rental complex. He
doesn't think that can be prevented. Commissioner MacCoy noted that his preference is for good
solid quality homes in the area. He noted that he does not want to see the project turned into a
series of rental units.
10. Mr. Pavelek again noted that it would be no different than a house being rented
out. Mr. Pavelek noted that the units are for a couple that don't want a backyard and the
responsibilities that go with it. The project is designed to allow common areas to be maintained
by the association without the responsibility of individual property upkeep.
Commissioner MacCoy inquired about the quality and materials used in the project. He
wanted to know what the buildings would be made of. Mr. Pavelek noted that they would come
back to the Commission with the owner at a later time to assure the Commission that quality
construction would be used.
Commissioner Borup noted that the property in question is a remnant from the first
development. Mr. Pavelek agreed with Commissioner Borup. Commissioner Borup inquired
about why it was not incorporated into the original subdivision. Mr. Pavelek noted it was
because it did not have direct access from the internal streets. He also noted that he did not know
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
why it was not included but it was all under the same ownership. Commissioner Borup inquired
ifit was a developer's decision. Mr. Pavelek stated that he did not know where the decision
came from.
Commissioner Borup noted item #8 of the Staff comments which referred to Ordinance #
580 which states that only single family, detached dwelling units shall be constructed. Mr.
Pavelek noted that when he had a teclmical review of the development, a number of issues were
covered but not the definition. Commissioner Borup inquired about an ACHD report. Mr.
Pavelek noted that ACHD had found that there is capacity to handle this development. He noted
that they are looking at a 24 foot wide lane of pavement. He noted the developer would provide
sidewalks, curb and gutter on the development site. He noted there is a ditch on the other side of
the street that allows for the 24 feet. He noted that its 24 feet of pavement and the developer
would provide the other share of the right of way.
Commissioner Borup inquired about the size of the right of way. Mr. Pavelek noted that
in the end, it will be a full 50 feet of right of way, but the balance will come off the adjoining
property .
Commissioner Borup inquired whether the improvements would extend to Pine. Mr.
Pavelek noted that they would not because there is a garage that sits in the right of way and
beyond. Commissioner Borup inquired if the sidewalk would go through it. Mr. Pavelek
responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Borup inquired about item #5 of the Specific Staff Comments. Mr.
Pavelek noted that it would require turning the two family lots into townhouse units and
shrinking the lot size to get to the common area requirement.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5
TEALEY/S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
(
Commissioner Borup inquired about the well development fees in lieu of the inigation
system and whether that has ever been paid. Mr. Pavelek stated: "I think that probably would be
the more pertinent question, and again that's something that I think the burden on us would be to
find a confirmation that in fact had been paid. I presume that it had because there was multiple
phases and I can't imagine that we could do phase one, not pay the fee, come back and do a
second phase. So my assumption is that it has been paid, but we could find record of that."
Commissioner Smith noted that he drove around the whole area of the project. He noted
that the whole area was single family dwellings. He wanted to know why should the
Commission deviate from the single family detached dwellings for a few remaining parcels. Mr.
Pavelek noted that there may be other similar units in the area and further this concept is
compatible with a single family residential area. Commissioner Smith commented that the units
are compatible in certain situations, but he does not necessarily believe that this is one of them.
11. Robin Shay was sworn in by the Assistant City Attorney. She noted that there
would be approximately four (4) home sites backing up to her back yard. She is concerned about
the townhouses overlooking her backyard and how it could effect her kids being able to play in
their own backyard. She noted that she is opposed to the development and prefers that homes be
built on the property in order to match the surrounding single family detached residences.
12. Commissioner Borup inquired whether there were plans for the property across
the street. P & Z Administrator Stiles noted that the property is not annexed into the City.
13. Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and
Zoning Administrator, have submitted general connnents and site specific comments. Those
comments are as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
(-
GENERAL C01vllv1ENTS:
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 inigation/drainage district, or lateral
users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to
the Public Works Department. No variances have been requested for tiling
of any ditches crossing this project.
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. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Public Works
Department. Fire hydrant locations shall be depicted on the preliminary plat
map.
4. Sewer and water mains shall be extended to and through the proposed
development.
5. 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.
6. Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section
11-9-606.B.
7. Water service to this development is contingent upon positive results from a
hydraulic analysis by our computer model.
8. Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the
subdivision and street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform.
9. Indicate any existing FEMA Flood Plain Boundaries on the Preliminary Plat
Map, and/or any plans to reduce said boundaries.
SITE SPECIFIC C01vllv1ENTS:
1. Sanitary sewer service to this site will be via an extension of the existing
main in Danbury Fair Subdivision. Approval of this application needs to be
contingent upon our ability to accept the additional sanitary sewage
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 7
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
\
generated by this proposed 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
Warks Department. Sewer manholes are to be provided to keep the sewer
lines on the south and west sides of centerline.
2. Water service to this site will be via extensions of existing mains installed in
Danbury Fair Subdivision and adjacent in E. Pine Avenue. 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. 100-watt high pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations
designated by the Public Works Department. All streetlights shall be
installed at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections
and/or fire hydrants.
4. A detailed landscape plan for the conunon areas shall be submitted for
review and approval with submittal of the final plat map. A letter of credit
or cash surety will be required for the improvements prior to signature on
the final plat.
5. This development is being proposed as a planned development under the
conditional use permit process. One requirement of planned developments
is that the total area of all conunon open space shall equal or exceed ten
percent (10%) of the gross land area of the PD and that all conunon area
contain improvements which are accessible and available to all occupants of
the planned development. A total of 3,558 square feet is shown as a
conunon area, which is 1,482 square feet less than required. In addition,
drainage retention/detention ponds should not be considered as common
open space because they are invariably more of a nuisance than an amenity.
Applicant is to increase open space size to meet minimum 10% requirement
and provide detailed plans of the drainage area for the City's determination
as to suitability for inclusion as conunon open space. 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 system.
6. Although the plat map indicates the rear building setbacks are 15' minimum,
the layout shown and floor plans of proposed units would leave only a 10'
rear setback.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
(
7. When Maws Subdivision was originally proposed for annexation and
subdivision, in approximately March of 1992, the application indicated that
pressurized irrigation would be provided to all lots within the subdivision.
Then in November of 1992, the Applicant petitioned Nampa-Meridian
Irrigation District for exclusion from the District and was successful. Was
this done because there was, in fact, no water available to the property, or
was it done to avoid providing pressurized irrigation to the subdivision? A
review of City records indicates no variance from the pressurized irrigation
requirement was ever granted by Council. The City Treasurer is
investigating whether well development fees were ever deposited for phases
1 and 2 of Maws Addition. If pressurized irrigation is not being proposed, a
variance from City Ordinance would need to be granted and appropriate fees
paid for all phases.
8. The ordinance annexing this property, Ordinance No. 580, states that the
property shall only have single-family, detached dwelling units constructed.
9. Revise the Preliminary Plat Map to show all adjacent land use and existing
zoning of properties surrounding the proposed development. Show the
location of the homes and the right-of-way line on the western side of
Adkins Lane.
10. Add to note 3 that the drainage lot is to be owned and maintained by the
homeowners association, and that a blanket easement is to be granted to the
Ada County Highway District for the "Heavy Maintenance" of the drainage
facility .
11. Adkins Lane should be shown on the plat as Adkins Avenue as this street
section will be public and is not a dead-end street.
12. 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.
13. 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.
10. Kenny Bower, Meridian Fire Chief, requires that all codes will be met, and that
hydrants will need to be put in.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVIS~ON NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
11. Bill Gordon, Meridian Police Chief, noted that small homes create low income areas
that need extra police services.
12. Jim Carberry, Administrator of Support Programs, of the Joint School District No.2
submitted a letter which included comments that he notes the project is for only 9 residential
homes. He cannot say if the development will greatly effect the student enrollments to the school
district, but it comes down again the the growth factor. He did state the Meridian School District
will grant approval of the request.
13. The Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District reqUIres a Land Use Change/Site
Development application to be filed for review prior to final platting. Additionally, all laterals and
wasteways must be protected. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any
surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District must review drainage
plans. The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. It is recommended that irrigation
water be made available to all developments within the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District.
14. Opal Farrington, and Mark and Anita Vives, submitted a letter of disapproval of the
project.
15. There was no further testimony given at the hearing.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. All the procedural requirements of the Local Planning Act and of the Ordinances of
the City of Meridian have been met, including the mailing of notice to owners of property within
300 feet of the external boundaries of the property.
2. The City of Meridian has authority to grant conditional uses pursuant to Idaho Code
Section 67-6512 and pursuant to 11-2-418 of the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
of Meridian.
3. The City has the authority to take judicial notice of its own ordinances, other
governmental statutes and ordinances, and of actual conditions existing within the City and the
State.
4. The property is currently zoned (R-8) Medium Density Residential District The (R-
8), Medium Density Residential District is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B 4. as
follows:
CR.-g) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose of the
(R -8) District is to permit the establishment of single- and two-family dwellings at a
density not exceeding eight (8) dwelling units per acre. This district delineates
those areas where such development has or is likely to occur in accord with the
Comprehensive Plan of the City and is also designed to permit the conversion of
large homes into two-family dwellings in well-established neighborhoods of
comparable land use. Connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the
City of Meridian is required.
5. Conditional Use Permit is defined in the Zoning And Development Ordinance, City
of Meridian, Idaho as "Permits allowing an exception to the uses authorized by this Ordinance in a
zoning district."
6. The City of Meridian has authority to place conditions on a conditional use permit
and the use of the property pursuant to Idaho Code, Section 67-6512, and pursuant to that section
conditions minimizing the adverse impact on other development, controlling the duration of
development, assuring the development is maintained properly, and on-site or off-site facilities may
be attached to the permit; that 11-2-418 (D) authorizes the City to prescribe a set time period for
which a conditional use may be in existence.
7. Section 11-2-418 D. states as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
In approving any Conditional Use, the Commission and Council may prescribe
appropriate conditions, bonds, and safeguards in conformity with this Ordinance.
Violations of such conditions, bonds or safeguards, when made a part of the terms
under which the Conditional Use is granted, shall be deemed a violation of the
Ordinance and grounds to revoke the Conditional Use. The Commission and
Council may prescribe a set time period for which a Conditional Use may be in
existence.
8. This Application for a conditional use has been judged upon the basis of guidelines
contained in Section 11-2-418 of the Zoning And Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian
and upon the basis of the Local Planning Act of 1975, Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, and the record submitted to it and the things of which
it may take judicial notice.
9. Section 11-2-418 C of the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of
Meridian sets forth the standards under which the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City
Council shall review applications for Conditional Use Permits. Upon a review of those
requirements and a review of the facts presented and the conditions of the area, assuming that the
above conditions or similar ones thereto would be attached to the conditional use, the Planning and
Zoning Commission concludes as follows:
a. The use, would constitute a conditional use and a conditional use permit
would be required by ordinance;
b. The use would not be harmonious with and in accordance with the
Comprehensive Plan and the Ordinance; the open space requirement for a
planned unit development is 10%. 9-607 (G) (5) (e). The proposed project
does not meet that requirement. The development plan does not address the
issue of pressurized irrigation and there has been no request from the
applicant in that regard. The annexation and zoning ordinance for this
project limited all building to single family detached dwellings. The
ordinance would need to be amended in order to permit townhouse
construction on the site. The setback requirement for a backyard is 15 feet.
The plan noted a 10 foot setback. There is a 50 foot frontage requirement.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 12
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
The proposed plan noted a 45 foot frontage. The square footage requirement
for a home is 1301 square feet. The developer is proposing 1209 square
feet.
c. The use would not be designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be
harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended
character of the general vicinity, and that such use will change the essential
character of the same area; see item (b) above.
d. The use would not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future
neighboring uses;
e. The use will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services
such as highways, streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures,
refuse disposal, water, sewer or that the person responsible for the
establishment of proposed conditional use shall be able to provide
adequately any such services;
f. The use will create excessive additional requirements at public cost for
public facilities and services and the use will not be detrimental to the
economic welfare of the community; there has been no proposal concerning
the use of pressurized irrigation or a well development fee proposal for this
proj ect.
g. The use will involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and
conditions of operation that will not be detrimental to any persons, property
or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise,
smoke, fumes, glare or odors;
h. The use will have vehicular approaches to the property which shall be so
designed as not to create an interference with traffic on surrounding public
streets; and
1. The development of the property will not result in the destruction, loss or
damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance.
It is recommended that the conditional use permit be denied in this case.
10. It is recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission that the previous
comments by the Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles, and Assistant City Engineer,
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 13
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
Bruce Freckleton, be incorporated along with the following conditions if a conditional use permit is
granted.
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
7 -517 . Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape
irrigation.
3. 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.
4. Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for
review by the Meridian City Attorney.
5. Provide five-foot-wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section
11-9-606 B.
6. Submit a letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the
subdivision and street names. Make any corrections necessary to conform.
7. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the Meridian Public Works
Department.
11. The above-conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the Applicant shall meet
these conditions.
12. It is recommended that the request for the conditional use permit be denied.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 14
TEALEY'S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian Plamring and Zoning Commission hereby adopts and approves these Findings
of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
C01vllvfISSIONER BORUP
VOTED
C01vllvfISSIONER MACCOY
VOTED
C01vllvfISSIONER SNIITH
VOTED or
C01vllvfISSIONER NELSON
VOTED --'
C01vllvfISSIONER DeWEERD
VOTED /
DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION
The Meridian Plamring and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council of
the City of Meridian that it deny the Conditional Use Permit requested by the Applicant for the
property described in the Application. However if the permit is approved the Applicant shall satisfy
the conditions set forth in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law or similar conditions as
found justified and appropriate by the City Council and that the property be required to meet the
water and sewer requirements, the Fire and Life Safety Codes, Uniform Fire Code, parking
requirements, and the paving and landscaping requirements, and all Ordinances of the City of
Meridian. The conditional use should be subject to review upon notice to the Applicant by the
City.
MOTION:
APPROVED: ~
6-8-98 -- Final
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 15
TEALEY/S LAND SURVEYING - MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (R-4)
(
(
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law on this 1st day of September, 1998.
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMAN ANDERSON
VOTED~
VOTED~
VOTED~
VOTED~
COUNCILMAN BIRD
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER)
VOTED
(INITIAL)
APPROVE~
DISAPPROVED
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR MAWS SUBDIVISION NO.3
\\
\....
(dd~
fi~-9r3~(!!e ~
RECEIVED
~
CITY OF MERIDIAN
GENERATIONS PLAZA
SfP - 1 1998
an Of imUmAN
The following is the Bid Schedule for the City of Meridian Generations Plaza. The ~Lf1
award 't{ill be based on the lowest Total Bid subject to the requirements of (j
Paragraph 15 of the Information For Bidders. The unit price for each bid item shall
be YVritten in fiqures and words in the spaces provided. The total bid price shall
be 'vVritten in fiqures in the spaces provided.
BID SCHEDULE OF ITEMS AND PRICES
BID SCHEDULE
Bid Approx. Unit
Item Descri tion Quantit Unit Price Total
Mobilization (max 5O~ 0" 000.00
1 of total bid 1 LS
Unit Price: EtG lIT n-lot.J5A1U0
and 00 I a~
Fountain Installation 1
2 Unit Price: -rwe. I sevl?A.J THorJ5,.J.I-rO 5' eX'
" and 00
Uti I ities
3 Unit Price:
and
Columns/Beams
4 Unit Price: THJ fL. I
and D
Planters/Equipment LS
5 Vault
Unit Price:
and
Concrete Flat Work
6 Unit Price:
and
Column Fountains
7 Pools
Unit Price:
and
Paver Installation
8 Unit Price:
and
1(\
J
J
'--
r.
(
9
Clock Installation
Unit Price: ON~ (-to
and 00 oD
Sollards
Unit .Price:
and
Electrical
Unit Price:
and
1
S.i'A WO\ISNJ"O)
c;.c:I
10
11
,DO
TOTAL BID:
300,00
The above prices shall include aI/labor, material, overhead, profit, insurance, etc.,
to cover furnishing and performing the Work as called for and specified. The above
prices shall also include all applicable taxes and fees.
The Bidder understands that quantities fisted are approximate and the Ovvner
reserves the right to increase or decrease individual items as may be, in its sole
judgment) to its best interest depending upon conditions encountered or observed
during the execution of the Work.
.
;;spectf~e~. L
Signature
Name: MARK N. GUHO
(typed or printed)
.PRESIDENT
Date:
8/27/98
Title:
..,
(SEAL if Bid is by a corporation)
Attest (for bids by corporations):
"1 "1
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING 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:
SEPTEMBER 1 t 1998
ITEM NUMBER: 16
WATER. SEWER. TRASH DELINQUENCIES
COMMENTS
~
Olfr
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
(
9'(ti~
(1) -<
=t- ~.
~ ~ ~
f"\"\ ('D 0
~o-~
....; ~. .
~~
=.:~~
~o(t)
~=~
(t) ~ e;
en =" ('D
s~
f'"'+=="
o-C'D
o ...... (ti
~ c. ~
· e:.. t...<
~ tj S'
(t) I-' · ~
s s. S
o a 8..
s(l,....
~O="
o = a
~
~ v 9'
9' ~ ('D
(l)~~
a en S
8~~
o ~ ~
~~~
~o~
)-010 · ~ (t)
cno-e:..
:-. ~ 0
r.I'J 0 ~
(l="
o ~
o-(D
('t) go
tTj(t)
-< 0-
(t) (t)
= 0
)o0oi' ·
f""'t-oo
=" ~.
o 0
= =
~S-
gogo
(t) ('D
~(l
~ .....-
:gq
(t)
e:..
v
~~ ~. Q Q g. 3:
~==qq(t>
~ ~ g. Q a. ~
"'d o-a s:: S ~
(ti tn. ~ = a ..
V'.1 ('j 0 0 ,...- ~
('DOc:=':Or-:J
= = ~ f"+= t:T
~ f"'"+s · ~ 0 =- tn ·
~ ~ ~ ~ (t) ......
=-.... ~ ~ e; 00
o 8..,,~ ~ S' g
~or:n~(JQ~
,....= ('D ~
~ ~ S' a 0
(D r./l (t) '-...l t:i
00 m...;~.. ~
g ~ ~ ~ ~~
n tr10-0 ~S
o ~ fI""+ =. f-ooI
= ~ ~ ~ S.
(t ffio.
~trl="~-1~
r-+ ~ ~ (t) = ~_
=" f'V I-' - c...... (t) f""'t-
(t) ~ == = 00 S-
=;. ,,0\ S' &" ~ gtl
~ 1--6,...., (t) "< ..... _
~\O(t)o-7JJ.~
(t \0 S~ 0 trj~
~oo =~o
~ [~ ~ @ ~
~("Da~~O
(1) rJ.J - ~ 0
~ 00 ('") rJJ.
~ "'d ~ fZ trl ('t)
o-s~O~~g
= =:s c>v
~ ~ 0-...... ~
~(1)~o-~O
~a~(t)\O=
~\O="
0- ~. (ti ~ 00 ~
('t) t.fj .-+- ~ <
........S · ~ ~ 0- ~ (1)
(t) S - f""'+- (t)
~n ="~9'
= ~. n (t) Q ('D
(D -< 0 (':) (1)
= ("t) = ~ L!: ::t.
o 0- ~ s- ~ (JQ.
~ S.o (1) ="
· ~ t::.: f""'t-
Z · es=:g
o ~-1~~ ~
- =,,0-0
~ 1-'- ('D ~ ~
('D ~ V'J,...,.a ~
00 CFJ rJJ. \J ~ ('D
~ ~ ("t) ~ ;::3 I
8g~g.0-
en ~ l-'- l-'- 9'
~ ('t) g tfJ (t)
~
~
o
~~
~~
oo~
("')2
=,0
~~
~~
~~
~("')
~~
~~
00
~~
~
\C
.............
~
0'\
~
oc
(~. rv OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY L1l.
I
ACCT NAME i ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
I
1-220 JOHNSON, MILDRED '330 BROADWAY AVE W I 69.53
I
1-1330 ESTES, KAY LOUISE 813 3RD ST W 53.44
1-2040 SEAMONS, DOUGLAS 1203 I DAHO AVE W 63.48
1-2290 FULLME~ TRAVIS & JENNIFER 631 15TH ST NW 50.62
1-2770 RIGENHAGEN, HAROLD E 552 15TH ST NW 49.39
1-3200 NE~ MARYANN 847 PINE AVE W 61.69
1-3330 MIGNEAULT, LESLIE D !631 PINE AVE W 60.46
2-402 lLUBACKY, ANDREW & DANITA 1912 7TH AVE NW I 71.81
2-496 lBUCHANAN, DANIEL & KAREN 11039 7TH AVE NW I 71.81
2-756 lBLOOME~ NANCY 1048 WHITE LILY AVE N I 342.13
2-850 [KARDAS, mSTIN 1945 11TH ST W ( 77.46
2-1180 CORNISH, MICHAEL 113161ST ST W I 107.68
2-1510 MANWARING, MARK 11305 1ST ST W f 70.19
2-1690 NASH, E RALPH 1616 2ND ST W i 97.53
i
[2-1730 DRBARRYSAMS 403 CHERRY LN W 107.81
l2-1770 CHERRY LANE LAUNDROMAT 309 CHERRY LN W ! 726.71
[2-1870 [PIPE~ LARRY 306 MAPLE AVE W ! 61.02
i
[2-1890 OEWITT,TERESA 324 MAPLE AVE W 57.05
12-1970 LARSON, KERRY L 225 MAPLE AVE W I 72.37
12-2030 MEYE~ VIRGINIA 230 CAMELLIA AVE j 69.52
l2-2060 F ARME~ SCOTT 314 CAMELLIA AVE 79.75
l2-21 00 SALMAN, CHRISTOPHER 231 CAMELLIA AVE 71.81
l2-2130 BALDWIN, SHAWN & PIXIE 207 CAMELLIA AVE 60.74
~-2150 NEAGLE, LOUIE J 216 CHERRY AVE 170~5
l2-2290 RICH, JAMES 1230 2ND ST W 116.78
l2-2350 HARPE~ DIANA 126 WASHINGTON AVE W 84.28
~-2360 SEINKNECHT, DA VID 202 WASHINGTON AVE W 76.89
~-2520 MARTIN, RYAN 1326 4TH ST W 105.58
l2-2550 PACK, PAUL 1313 4TH ST W 90.03
2-2610 PRION, TODD 464 PACK AVE W 80.42
2-2722 BURKMAN, JULIA 1425 CRESTMONT DR N 78.24
~-2748 PACK, PAUL 13234TH ST W 155.54
l2-3340 POE, RICHARD 1115 6TH ST W 107.31
[2-4550 VINCENT,T01\1MY 1329 13TH AVE W 71.14
l2-4590 CARNAHAN, JOHN 1231 13TH ST W 70.74
~-4630 HARVEY, BRUCE G 1239 MAPLE ST 98.76
12-4720 HENDRIKSE, DA VID & EDITH 132414TH ST W 52.06
2-4800 TODD, JUDY L 1400 NORTHGA TE AVE 98.94
2-501 0 EARLEY, GEORGE 1536 LINDER RD N 69.91
~-5040 MITCHELL, BARRY D 1527 NORTHGA TE AVE 138
~-5130 CASPERSEN, MAUREEN K 1433 14TH ST W 88.46
~-5400 STVENSON, MICHAEL 1426 ELM PLACE 55.82
~-5670 RANSOM, JAMES R_ 1017 15TH AVE W 79.41
[2-5850 DUPEROUZEL, PIDLLIP A 1406 CARL TON ST W 110.38
9/1/98 5:31 PM
( (
'-I rY OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY LI~ I
ACCT NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
[2-5900 HARVEY, LISAM 1104 15TH AVE W 93.44
[2-5940 M A R~TNEAU, SHIRLEY 11037 WASHINGTON CL 1 48.16
I
2-5960 SCHULE~ E GAINES & R 1104 WASHINGTON PL ! 124.39
l2-6030 KRASOWSKI, TOM 1017 12TH AVE W I 101.26
!
e-6380 NONAMAKE~ STEVE G 908 WASHINGTON DR W I 66.75
3-6 JOHNSON, STEVEN & BONNY ~040 SLATON DR W 61.02
3-38 SKOGERSON, THOMAS l2175 JAYTON DR W 86.45
3-298 KING, DA VID R ~137 SNYDER DR W I 93.44
1
3-308 [BITTNE~ MICHAEL 2065 SNYDER DR W 74.83
3-312 lBURKETT, JEFFREY & ROXANNE ~019 SNYDER DR W 85.23
~8 MAYE~DAVIDE 814 ROTAN AVE N 59.79
3-412 TIIURBE~ RICHARD 1635 TALL PINE PL N 64.43
3-502 ATKINSON, SHAUN 1816 TALL PINE PL N I 70.56
!
3-808 NASADOS, JAMES 1689 OCEAN AVE N I 89.29
3-826 DEFFERIES, JAVENE ~451 SNYDER ST W 53.36
3-830 DONLON, KATHRYN 12407 SNYDER ST W 76.06
3-832 NEW CONCEPTS DEVELOPLERS, INC ~381 SNYDER ST W ! 58
j
3-844 STAMMERJOHN, JTh11vIY I 16 BROWNFIELD WY W 1 53.08
3-870 FEDORCHUK. LANA ~3 BROWNFIELD WY N 84.28
3-874 MONTGO:rv1ERY, JON 599 BROWNFIELD WY N 53.36
3-878 SIMPSON, WILLIAM BEN 2502 SNYDER ST W 57.05
4-914 OLSEN, H. DEAN 922 MAURA PL N 1 62.25
4-1240 PEARSON, RONALD 2512 CARL TON ST W 54.57
4-1294 NS BLASE~ GLENN 2537 CARL TON ST W 121.68
4-1412 PLUMLEY, RODNEY & M NAOMI 2826 LEONARD CT W 90.26
4-1414 GLOVE~ STEVE t2830 LEONARD CT W I 56.77
4-1598 OGAN, JOHN & DAWN l2S57 WILLARD ST W i 84.95
4-1776 LANSING, BUD ~628 WILLARD ST W ! 117.49
j
TI-IIBADEAU, BRIAN 11360 STUCKER AVE N I 102.1
4-1778 I
j
4-1834 BITONI, MARK l2495 SANTA CLARA DR W I 99.43
i
4-2174 LANE, MARTIN 11775 SANTA CLARA DR W 1 61 e 77
4-2200 BLA YE, LUCREZIA !1702 SANTA CLARA DR W ! 78e 91
i
4-2304 KOYLE, RUSSELL 11515 SANTA ROSA PL N I 105e3
i
4-2308 BUTTERFIELD, CHARLES & TONI !1475 SANTA ROSA PL N ! 193.25
!
4-2320 PRIGGE, ROBERT & JOAN '1516 VINEYARDS AVE N I 120.73
4-2352 GREAT CLIPS 1737 CHERRY LN W ! 135e04
j
5-160 ANDERSON, GORDON & JUDYTH 3978 ASPEN CREEK CT W I 132.92
KLAPWYK, JACK & CONNIE 13953 PARK CREEK DR W I
5-168 i 70.3
t
5-172 LANGE~ KATHLEEN 13992 THORN CREEK CT W ! 115.98
j
5-194 RATZBURG, CHARLES 13942 PARK CREEK DR W 81.93
5-264 RADUE, PAUL '1225 SAW CREEK PL N I 206.56
j
HART, RANDY 3353 PARK CREEK DR W I 217.41
5-506 i
5-640 CARTWRIGHT, DOUGLAS 1352 CLIFF CREEK PL N 118.55
5-738 GARY HICKS CONSTRUCTION !3601 FIR CREEK CT W 145.33
9/1/98 5:31 PM
( (
'-'. rv OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY LI~ I
Acel NAME ; ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
,
7-994 CONTE, ROGER '1767 GREEN HEAD DR W I 58.28
!
CRONER, CHAD 3618 MUIRFIELD DR W ! 53.08
19-118 !
19-228 MELLEN CONSTRUCTION 2559 TURNBERRY WAY N 48.16
20-1510 ALLRED, JAY D 1855 OAK HILLS DR N 63.28
20-1584 [LOV AN, RICHARD 3728 SUGAR CREEK DR 90.15
20-1638 tLINK, THOMAS 1920 INCLINE WY 88.36
20-1664 [MEDLEY, STEVEN 13761 WOODMONT DR 149.52
20-1774 ~STON, STEPHEN & AMY 13732 ST ANWICH DR W 93.28
20-1964 TEeD INVESThffiNTS 13951 SUGAR CREEK DR 78.91
20-1988 JONES, SYLVIA ~749 QUAKER RIDGE DR 176.31
20-2010 (MILLER, GARY & CHARLENE 3740 QUAKER RIDGE DR 161.27
20-2026 MILLER, TERESA C 3737 SUGAR CREEK DR 127.16
20-2034 GROSSMAN, MICHAEL M 3606 QUAKER RIDGE DR 85.62
20--2062 :MIXON, CLAUDE 3281 SUGAR CREEK DR 74.84
21-2 CLIFFORD, JOHN '1602 TODD WAY 71.69
21-4 WALKER FAMILY TRUST 1632 TODD WAY 66.89
21-22 CONRAD, STEVEN 1820 KRISTEN WAY 72.92
21-52 BALDWIN, ROBERT 2088 LEANN WAY 65.94
21-104 ~UDA, BRANDON ~634 WA TERSTONE WAY N 59.51
21-204 DUMOND, DANA & DANA [2660 CREEKSTONE CT W 163.16
21-208 SILSBY, TERRY 12674 OLD STONE WY N ! 175.19
21-464 BARR, JERROD F 2500 WHITESTONE DR W 73.04
121-502 ST ANPIllLL, CYNTIllA 2818 QUARRYSTONE WY N 88.75
~1-510 LANE, LEX 2870 QUARRYSTONE WY N 69.63
~1-586 MACISAAC, JAMES 2650 PEBBLESTONE CT W 132.32
~1-996 GOURLEY, KRISTEN ,2723 PEBBLESTONE CT W I 155.42
121-1010 ABS[MEIER, JAMES & CINDY ~911 QUARRYSTONE WY N ! 50.23
121-1032 VELADA, FEDERICO ~956 FIELDSTONE WY N 95.46
121-1068 MTTRR Y, JOHN 12748 WHITESTONE CT W 105.24
l21-1132 MELTON, GARY 2463 MAXI E WY N 91.21
~1-1174 TWADDLE, DA VID 2492 CHATEAU DR W 111 .06
[21-1706 STACY, GERALD 2481 CHATEAU DR W 120.23
~1-1708 ARTE, MICHELLE & RICK 2287 LEANN WAY 99.14
l21-1712 JAMES, [MELANIE 2245 LEANN WAY 82.02
121-1766 COFFMAN, RICK K 1960 MARIANNA PL 113.69
121-1828 PRINTZ,DENIA ~645 REBECCA WAY 70.04
121-1892 ORSBORN, JERRYE l2570 MISTY DRIVE 102.84
l21-1918 CULVER, JAMES 2482 REBECCA WAY 89.03
LUNA, JUAN S I 115.01
l21-2182 3040 HIGAN ST W I
l21-2188 PELTIER, SEAN & LATISHA 3148 HIGAN ST W I 73.6
l21-2198 LOV AN, JENNIFER 13035 KANDICE ST W 67.65
l21-2240 WARD, NIIKE 3020 KANDICE ST W 97.53
l21-2678 PITMAN, DONALD ~902 KENDRICK ST W 58.56
l21-2728 ATKINSON. MONICA l2448 STONE PL N 122.31
9/1/98 5:31 PM
{ (
\"'1 rv OF MERtDIAN - DELINQUENCY Lib I
ACCT NAME ADDRESS NOTES ! PAST DUE
21-2768 THURBER, RICHARD 12566 VICTOR WY N 104.83
21-2918 REYES, DA VID & KAREN l2953 ELK STREAM ST W 85.06
21-3018 LARSON, GORDON ~887 HEARTH AVE N 74.83
l21-3070 DECK, KIMBERL Y 2921 JOUST ST W 100.6
~1-3120 MCCORMICK, ROBERT 2974 HEARTH AVE N 137.84
l22-204 BENNETT, WILLIAM & PAMELA 11963 SILVER FALLS CT W 59.25
~2-338 LAMKEY,ALLEN 11861 TRACY CT I 93.59
~2-476 GARDNER, LAWRENCE 2156 CHA TEAU DR W ! 88.08
22-810 BRUNELLO, JOHN L 2257 ASTAIRE WAY N I 78.51
t22-868 POLLARD, RONALD 2307 KUBIK PL N I 173.68
l22-914 RUCKER, JEAN 2261 MONACO WAY I 132.02
22-1056 HALE, DEW AINE 2023 GLENNFIELD PL N I 350.97
22-1088 REDDY, TODD 1936 SPARKLING PL N 78.91
22-1356 KERBS, MARVIN L 1983 HENDRICKS CT 157.02
~2-1380 STORER, GEORGE & PATRICIA 2008 MONACO WAY 125.15
22-1414 MOSGROVE, G THOMAS & RONNA 1785 MCGLINCHEY ST W 128.17
22..1438 roUMONT, JR TED 1765 HENDRICKS ST W i 68.68
22-1440 MILLER, JOSEPH 1749 HENDRICKS ST W 111.12
~2-1466 SHELDON, MARCUS 1710 HENDRICKS ST W 107.81
~2-1482 ANDERSON, LYLE D ,1723 SANDALWOOD DR 120.23
22-1504 SIMPSON, RANDY 11764 SANDAL WOOD DR 88.64
22-1622 WRIGHT, DARRIN 11681 CHATEAU DR W 85.9
22-1634 [ERICKSON, EV A LOUISE ~291 LINDER RD N 48.16
22-1650 FRANK, GARY 12181 LINDER RD N 69.07
31-10 CANDYLAND DAYCARE 1130 CHERRY LN W ! 71.14
31-176 OBERBUBOR, JOHN 191212TH ST NW ! 365.09
i
31-190 STEPHEN, BRET & DEBORAH 1965 12TH ST NW r 83. 16
i
~1-198 [EDW ARDS, ALLAN & JANICE 1966 13TH AVE NW ! 97.81
I
31-492 J & M LLC 1401 SANDALWOOD DR I 406.83
BOKMAN, HELEN 1510 STOREY ST i 117.17
31-512 i
i
31-516 JARRETT, SHARON 1542 STOREY AVE ! 147.92
31-608 WALKER, MICHAEL 1333 NEWPORT DR 131 .58
31-628 KYSAR, ANITA 1319 NEWPORT DR 112.85
31-728 ~ERTO,KATHARINE 1332 NEWPORT DR 123.92
31-842 tLARRANDO, DARLENE 1220 DELMAR DR I 54.31
31-880 [NICK, DENNIS 1512 CHATEAU AVE W 157.86
31-1006 SWEAT, STEVEN M 1493 DARRAH DR 109.66
31-1274 CALLISON, JAMES & BARBARA l2662 12TH ST W 81 .26
31-2230 WATTERS. TAMI 2691 13TH ST NW 63.86
31-2234 TILDEN, R JASON 12647 13TH ST NW I 81.65
31-2236 P ARSONS, LINDA ~635 13TH ST NW 95.2
31-2262 NOLAN, ROBERT 11494 DARRAH DR ! 58.28
31-2280 GRAFFIS, TODD & TERESA 1384 CLAIRE ST f 164.33
i
31-2304 GESELLE,KAREN ~801 15TH ST NW 1 173.73
i
9/1/98 5:31 PM
( (
'-I rY OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY Lrv.
ACCT NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
31-3036 HASSIS, BENJAMIN & PAM 1303 CHA TEAU AVE W 1 01 .22
31-3232 MTTRRAY JEFFREY 2311 11 TH ST NW 112.18
,
31-3242 MCGOWAN, DA VID E 221111TH ST NW 103.4
31-3280 PALNIE~ PAT 1170 NEWPORT CT W 73.28
31-3336 CRYE~ JUDITH 1811 DELMAR DR. 48.16
31-3364 BURGESS, ALLEN 12282 10TH AVE NW 83.16
31-3382 LEVITT, MONTE 12231 10TH ST NW 70.7
31-3394 CARROLL, PHILIP R 1080 DELMAR DR i 91.77
j
31-3406 ULIN,MARYH 1111 FAIRWOOD CT 84.39
31-3414 STINGE~ DA VID J. 1053 FAIRWOOD CT I 84.98
31-3420 COUCH, JULIA 1012 FAIRWOOD CT 101.27
31-3422 lALLEN,TIM 1034 F AIRWOOD CT I 97.63
31-3458 NS HOPKINS, DARRYL 12048 9TH PL NW 150.25
31-3496 MARTIN, TERRY 1190511TH AVE NW 94.51
31-3598 MCCAFFREY, IV AN !914 YOST AVE 49.39
31-3606 [FISCHE~ MARTIN 11836 10TH ST NW 148.52
32-566 tHICKS, BARBARA J 11919 CRESTMONT DR 119.47
32-616 lTOHNSON, CONNIE JO 11910 CRESTMONT DR 122.48
32-630 GARDNE~ VINCENT ~070 CRESTMONT DR 125.4
32-744 aARNARD, WILLIAM 30 WILLOWBROOK DR W ! 1 06.81
I
32-830 CARMONNE~ JOHN G. 482 WILLOWBROOK DR W 83.93
32-842 lITTLE, JOHN 689 WILLOWBROOK DR W 78.76
32-872 aECKE~ ROGER F 671 TIFFANY DR 127.61
32-978 SCHEIDELE~ COLETTE 320 SPICEWOOD DR W 88.75
32-1390 tRECORD~CLAYTON le22 WATERBURY DR W 71.14
32-1400 lANDIS, RANDAL 2570 RIDGEBURY WY N I 126.28
tpLASTE~ KURTIS & ELIZABETH 549 WOODBURY DR W ! 57.05
32-1420 !
32-1560 twOOD, ADRON 2572 8TH AVE NW 37.55
32-1632 twRIGHT, MICHAAL & SUSAN 639 WATERBURY DR W I 71.14
32-1694 RICE, E DONALD 100 CLAIRE ST W 109.95
33-56 TEL-CAR INe 220 FAIRVIEW AVE E 320.64
33-1832 CULLEY, TORY & SHAWNY 165 WOODBURY DR E 148.55
33-1836 GREEN, ROBERT 211 WOODBURY DR E I 78.91
33-2334 SZURGOT, DOUGLAS 637 WOODBURY DR E I 48.16
33-2338 HAMTI TON, TRACEY 677 WOODBURY DR E ! 80.92
I
33-2388 GLUCH, SCOTT 680 COUGAR DR E I 49.39
33-2534 PIllPPS, JAMES 667 GROUSE CT E I 48.16
33-2620 CECIL, ODETTE 722 BALDWIN ST E I 83.44
I
33-3630 NS aEEBE,GREGORY 510 BALDWIN ST E I 95
I
33-3662 twILSON. RANDY 556 WAKEL Y ST E 65.94
33-4344 CIRELLI, MARK 2557 LARCHMONT AVE N 83.03
33-4346 aOLLOWAY, RON & PAIGE 2531 LARCHMONT AVE N I 94.9
33-4578 [RHlNF,HART~ DOUG & MARY 2553 RICHTER AVE N I 97.59
33-7616 tMICHAELSON~BRADLEY 1128 EASTBROOK CT E 97.58
9/1/98 5:31 PM
( I
\." (Y OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY lll.
ACCT NAME ! ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
!
34-382 GRIMM, ROBERT & TERRY 1184 WILLOWBROOK DR E 292.32
34-388 nOWORTH, CHARLES & GAIL 2094 JERICHO WAY 114.49
34-552 FOSTER, BRADLEY D 2120 AMETHYST PL N 121 .18
34-632 BAKER, JAMES & SHIRLEY 1419 TOURMALINE ST E 73.6
34-800 ZEAR, KENNETH 998 CHA TEAU DR E 139.07
34-812 KAUTZ, KARL & LORRAINE 2298 10TH AVE NE 119.32
34-832 PLETCHER, MICHAEL R 1968 BLUE HERON ST E I 67.84
34-884 GREENFIELD, LONNIE 1981 GROUSE DR E ! 71.53
34-886 DUREN, ALLEN & KELLE 11021 GROUSE DR E 343.44
34-928 LEWIES, LINDA 11407 HUNTER DR E 99.82
34-1034 ROBINSON, KENNETH 12465 ELK COVE WY N 118.72
34-1080 CHAST AINE, LEIF 12598 SHOVELER WA Y N 77.57
34-1178 KARl E, STEPHANIE 12590 BLACK BEAR WY N I 297.85
34-1472 MARKHAM:, RON 12898 MULE DEER WA Y N 75.11
34-1534 OLSEN, CHAD 1775 FINCH CREEK ST E 1 112.6
I
34-1536 HERNANDEZ, WILLIAM 1801 FINCH CREEK ST E I 55.58
34-1540 MONTEFERRANTE, MICHELLE 1847 FINCH CREEK ST E ! 89.68
TH01\1PSON, HARRY 12755 MULE DEER WAY N I 89.03
34-1550 I
34-1560 PHILIP, HAROLD 952 HAWK ST E i 125~26
I
34-1756 SANDBURG, TONY 2283 LARK AVE N , 125.15
!
DA VIS, WADE & WYNETTE ;
34-1770 933 CHA TEAU DR E I 81.93
STONER, JERRY 11090 WILLOWBROOK DR E I 127.61
34-1800 !
34-1854 MCGURER, WAYNE 11011 CLAYBOURNE DR I 134.71
34-1946 HUTCmNSON, DAVID 1801 WILLOWBROOK DR E I 75.22
34-1948 MOORE, FORREST 821 WILLOWBROOK DR E I 120.23
I
34-1954 WINGATE, PHILLIP & DIANNE 905 WILLOWBROOK DR E 68.75
34-2090 ABBOTT, PERRY 1041 TAMMY ST 97,,25
34-2730 AL V AREZ, ROSALIO 1196 COUGAR CREEK DR E 77.42
40-248 GREENFIELD, VICTOR & DONNA 1686 SUMMERFALLS DR E 48.16
40-414 GLENN JOHNSON HO:MES 1866 SUMMERRIDGE DR E 57.1
40-422 CITY BUILDERS 1818 SUMMERRIDGE DR E 50.62
42-376 WELCH, ROBERT & TIFF ANY 2449 APRICOT DR E 115.7
42-452 JORGENSEN, THOMAS 2409 GRAPEWOOD DR E 141.59
42-1200 DOOLEY, DA VID & LESLIE 2110 CLARENE ST E 48.16
42-1824 BLACKER, ROY AL 2166 MEADOW WOOD DR E 63.48
f42-1832 BIRD, LORI 2086 MEADOW WOOD DR E 87.13
~2-1884 ~LILEE, JOHN & ARLENE 2055 SEQUOIA PL N 94.23
42-1899 MIRAGE :MEADOWS HO:MEOWNERS SPRINKLERS-MIR MEADWS 94.23
42-2084 MIDDLETON~ DA VID & LORI 2076 WINGATE PL N 98.68
42-2118 MILLER, JTh1 & SANDI 2287 WINGA TE PL N 104.63
~2-2138 RICE, JAMES P i2262 DEVLIN AVE N I 101 a22
42-2358 CRANDELL, LARRY 11838 GREENMEADOW CT E I 106.53
42-2530 ~ER, KELL Y & TAMMY 12031 LOCHMEADOW CT E I 125.71
42-2730 REP ACI, RANDALL 1866 GLENLOCH ST E 106.69
9/1/98 5:31 PM
-~ ~-
( (
\.01"{ (Y OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY LI~.
ACCT NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
~2-2736 LENAGHEN, CHRISTOPHER 1817 MEADOWGRASS ST E 88.75
142-3050 SCHOLZ, LESLIE 1874 CHALLIS DR E 65.11
~2-3058 PATTON, RICHARD 2710 CHIANTI WAY N 60.74
~2-3086 fLEW, KEVIN 12708 CHANCERY WA Y N 70.86
~2-4046 LEMA, ADAM M 11797 KAMA Y DR E 61.93
~6-1 06 BARNES, DA VID 1901 FILLMORE WAY N 62.25
~6-212 FINLAYSON, CRAIG 13826 PRESIDENTIAL DR E 82.22
~6-232 CHAN, KIN W A 3612 PRESIDENTIAL DR E 58
~6-462 tHAZLETT, RONALD 13449 EISENHOWER DR E 54.31
~6-4618 TABLE ROCK BREWERY 13550 COMMERICIAL CT E 309
50-194 WHITNEY, CLA YNE 524 STATE AVE E 46.19
50-262 NS MfTRRT, SCOTT 12 STATE ST E j 78.68
50-354 CARSTENSEN, DENNIS 416 CARLTON AVE E ! 89.7
I
50-726 CFI INVESThffiNTS 364 WASHINGTON AVE E I 39.08
50-750 BATES, LARRY 1328 2 1/2 ST E 1 77.35
50-1198 GARDOSKI, WILLIAM 16202 1/2 ST E I 66.61
I
KINNEY, KEVIN B 1331 2 1/2 ST E i 63.54
50-1242 i
--r
50-1254 SPENCE~ ROBERT & CAROLL 11323 2 1/2 ST E 84.67
50-1750 LACY, MEL 11414 MERIDIAN ST 71.81
50-1910 BROWN, GROVER h 578 PENRITH PL N 87.12
50-1922 MAZlJR JOHN 1513 PENRITH PL N 49.39
50-1988 MOORE, LARRY 11112 CROSSBILL CT E I 68~ 12
50-2036 RIVERA, KATHY & GUADALUPE 957 WENTWORTH ST W 64.15
50-2116 KIKKMA TR& JAMIE 11356 STONEHENGE WY N 66.89
,
50-2150 NELSON, RYAN & JILL ! 165.84
1966 WINSLOW ST E
50-2198 MASON, DOUG !864 ASH-FORD ST E 102.18
50-2290 NS BRYANT, JEREMIAH & GRETCHEN 1029 ASHFORD ST E 84.27
50-2342 S1vIITH, DANIEL & CHRISTI 1230 STONEHENGE WY N 122.69
50-2378 GUTHMILLE~ BRIAN A 1290 DRUCKER ST E 97.13
-
50-2420 H01ffi~ CAR Y 1401 DRUCKER ST E 77.57
50-2444 MCNITT, STEVE & TRACY 11472 PEMRITH AVE N 73.23
50-3734 CZ ARNE CKl, CHERYL j907 RALSTIN PL N 103.12
50-3740 YOUNG, DARON 1938 SCRIVNER WY N 66.61
50-3754 FRENCH, LAWRENCE 11589 BUCHMAN CT E 113.52
50-3784 ZAUAL~ JOSE 1137 SCRIVNER PL N 87.36
50-3800 ~YERS, SHEILA 1240 SCRIVNER AVE N 86.85
50-3810 [DUNN, ANDREW 11476 SHELL~ROOK DR E 48.16
50-3856 rwARD, THOMAS 11183 ADKINS AVE N 64.71
50-3898 OWEN, KEVIN 1309 SHELLBROOK DR E 73.27
50-4008 YOUNGBLOOD, JON 950 STONEHENGE WY N I 143.21
51-50 lAMYX FAMILY LTh1ITED 37 BROADWAY AVE E I 217.17
51-314 tHORTON, RICK 342 BROADWAY AVE E I . 53.36
51-326 tHA YMOND, DA VID A 318 BROADWAY AVE E 69.07
51-354 AUDIO ELECTRONICS 722 2ND ST E 62.56
9/1/98 5:31 PM
( (C
\.". rY OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY LI~.
ACCT NAME I ADDRESS NOTES ! PAST DUE
I
51-434 HERIT AGE BUILDING 1731 1ST ST E I 339.1
51-482 MTTRR Y, RICHARD !319 IDAHO AVE E ! 78.85
RAYGOZA, IGNACIO & VENIT A 1421 PINE AVE E I 94.12
51-890 !
i
JONES TRUST AGREEMENT 47 KING ST i
51-3098 i 36.32
I
51-3154 CORNELIUS, DONALD & JAZMIN 111 3RD ST E 188.07
51-3226 FREITAS, DANIEL 212 2ND ST E 56.32
51-3280 STENSON, VIRGINIA 121 KING ST E 106.32
51-3580 SPENCER JOHN R 126 KING ST E 114.47
51-4010 V AN HOUTEN, ROBERT 416 1ST ST E 81.69
51-4170 COLSON, HOWARD f435 2ND ST E 147.5
51-4290 JONES, BRET 1218 BOWER ST E 67.55
51-4320 DOUBLE-D SERVICE CENTER !S021ST ST E 619.52
52-150 FORS, GARY 152 MERIDIAN ST S 63.48
52-1644 BRIGHT BEGINNINGS DA YCARE 1510 WA TERTOWER LN E 494.08
65-264 BLISS, STEVEN ~655 SA YOU BAR WAYS 73.16
65-416 GUTH, KEVIN 12427 BRANDYS JEWEL AVE S 94.12
65-472 MARQUARDT, MICHAEL 2426 BAYOU BAR WAYS 64.46
65-636 BERHRENS, DA VID 1846 DOBERMAN DR E i 60.86
~8-98 MCGILVERY, BELINDA i2554 WEBER RAPIDS PL S 89.04
a9-152 NIELSON, CRAIG 11380 GRIFFON ST E 107.49
69-196 RIZKOWSKY, MARK 11393 DOBERMAN ST E 90.56
69-420 aESS, JOE [2005 ELKHOUND AVE S I 60.58
69-574 [BROWN, JAMES & SHERRY 11660 RETRIEVER WY S I 113.91
69-1084 ~TE, H BOYCE 11015 CAYMAN DR E I 56.19
i
69-1574 MASON, ROSS & DEBBIE 1618 LINKERSHIM DR E i 615.03
BACHMAN, MICHAEL L ! 213.94
69-1620 11836 5TH WAY SE
69-2262 SEDILLO, JOE 1925 COUNTRY TERRACE W S I 298.74
I
69-2268 ~W LIFE CHRISTIAN CENTER 246 ARUBA CT E I 193.15
72-258 PETERSON, KONNEL 2111 GULL COVE AVE S I 67.05
72-266 SOMAZZI, ROGER 77 CHRISTOPHER ST W 40.32
74-324 COPELAND, VALERIE 694 PENNWOOD ST 134.32
74-384 HESTER LL yon & SHERRY 656 FULMER CT 123.55
74-386 HAWLEY, AARON 676 FULMER CT 112.64
74-426 lACY, GLORIA 623 BARRETT ST 69.07
74-1032 MICHAELSON, BRADL Y C 46 ROSE CL 57.05
74-1040 [HOLLOW A V, JERALD 38 ROSE CL 50.62
74-1058 [DA VIS, NORMA 120 ROSE CL 76.34
74-2336 CROWELL, GARY 193 L YNWOOD CL 156.57
74-2338 PUCKETT, ROB 184 L YNWOOD CL 88.75
74-2520 TOLAND, DA VID 1395 KIMRA ST W 116.53
74-2558 CHASE, DENNIS & BONNIE 1065 PENNWOOD ST W I 145.15
74-2614 MACKRILL, MICHAEL ~989 KIMRA ST W 140.58
74-2724 [BISHOP, CAL VIN 11038 CRESTWOOD DR 1 00.27
74-2728 OGDEN, DEBRA 1112 CRESTWOOD DR 117.37
9/1/98 5:31 PM
(,(y OF MERIDIAN - DELINQUENCY L1C-
~'"
ACCT NAME I ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
74-2822 BARR, KENNETH 1421 CRESTWOOD DR W 283.6
74-2834 CROWLEY, BILL Y 1289 CRESTWOOD DR W 155.62
74-2840 MACHO, CRAIG & TAMMY 441 SPOONBILL AVE S 57.15
74-2848 KOCH, CINDY 501 SPOONBILL AVE S 97.84
74-2896 PERKINS, LORAINE & CHARLES 1520 MERGANSER DR W 116.99
74-2928 NS SWTH, ARLIN D 11322 PINTAIL DR W I 91.14
74-3000 PHILLIPS, RICHARD 1613 CANVASBACK WAY S i 63.56
74-3014 ARY, DAVID & LISA 1672 PELICAN WY S ! 64.43
WILSON, WILLIAM 1 I 72.09
74-3020 11091 LOON ST W
74-3086 [RAINES, DAN & SHANNA 1600 PELICAN WY S ! 53.08
I
74-3096 KOPET, DAVID 11075 EGRET DR W 97.97
74-3110 H A MMTTT, PHILIP & TRACEY 919 EGRET DR W 83.17
74-3118 HERNANDEZ, ROBERT 711 MUSCOVY AVE S 69.92
74-3208 MCCULLOUGH, JIM 844 GREENHEAD ST W 88.08
74-3238 RULE, DEBRA 1134 GREENHEAD DR W 117.36
74-3246 rvtEYE~ JOHN & LISA ~61 PELICAN WY S 196.89
74-3248 GARNE~ RICHARD & KELLY ~95 PELICAN WY S 95.07
74-3286 OWENS, GLENN & VICKIE 500 CANVASBACK WY S I 85.23
NELSON, mSTIN 1911 PELICAN WY S I 43.92
74-3378 !
74-3642 WATSON, WCHAEL 849 EIDER DR W I 119.15
I
74..3960 SHERARD, BILL 1363 WALMAN DR W I 115.98
I
i
I
! .
i I 39465.03
9/1/98 6:01 PM
en r~~' c.... c.... s: ~ s " C- D, Z 0
~ ( C C ~ m CD m ( 0 Sl s:
'< ::] ~. ..., 0- J <
f""+ t: (l) 0 ..., C CD CD 0 0
CD en ::T C R 3 3 rr Z
3 r+ R m
0'" 0'" -, --I
0- m m :x
m ..., -,
-,
-"" -Jrr.. I\J l\.) -"" l'V ~ I'\) ~ I\J -Jrr.. ~ =It ." ~
~ c..u ~ en CD 0> 01 ~ (0 en OJ w Cii Z
J\J -.....,J -.....,J tv en F\.) Q) 0> .....l.. -....J ~ (JJ -I
0 -f
C )> 0
0 r-
t\) r- CD 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t\) ~ ~ t\) I\) I\) I\) > S!! 0
~ 0> U) m co (J) ~ co co ~ 0'1 -l. (J) CD C
-l. U> co ~ c:.n <0 0 <0 co U> co 0 <0 ;u en Z
co ~ CJ) ~ J\) co 0'1 c,..) -.....J CD 0> ~ -l. en 0
0 !-'" 0 ~ ....... 0 (JJ ~ ~ en co U) -.....J
0 ....I.. 0 0'1 tv 0 CJ1 co co :,:... ~ :...., co ;=
<0 ~ -.....J co ()) <>> (J'I co ......... co I\) co m
.~.
=It ." -f
co co (J) .a:a... (.r,) (J1 CJ,) 0> (J1 W 0> en c:
<>> co ~ 0'1 co en co co ~ 0'1 ~ :J>
C 0 r-
0 ):II en
r-
,... CD ::J:
~ c:
m -l. -:a.. ~ -I
co 0 co 0'1 CJ,) I\) ~ CJ,) c..n '" ~ <>> :::u CD 0
co co ......... m N ......... ........ ....I.. U) t.n r\J m (fJ en
(JJ 0 01 -l. co ~ 0 (J'I ~ -l. ......... co "
........ !.:l 0 ~ -J. (..) -1.. ~ ~ <0 -1.. 01 "
~ ........ ~ co :...., W <0 ~ U) (J'I :..... <0
0 ~ ....... co (J) f\J ...1. 0 CJ1 ....... ~ CJ1
:u: ~
CI) U) (..) U) t\) ~ U) U) f\J U) tv -l. ." Z
~ 0 CJ1 0 co I\) ......... 0 (J'I CJ) I\) ....... CiS -I
I\) -l. 0 (X) -:II. ~ -...,J co ~ ~ 01 U)
C 0 -I
0 )> 0
(".) r- 0
U) CI.) U) (..) I\) (".) (J,) I\) ....lr. ~ I\) I\) r- CD
(...) Q) 01 I\) I\) ~ ....... .c::.. ....... .c::.. 0 m 0 ~ en 0
l\.) co ....... co co ....... I\J -l. ........ 01 ~ c.n .a::... -... c:
0> c.n ~ C>> co 0'1 U> -l. CJJ -l. ~ -l. -l. ;;u CD Z
tv 0 0 ~ J\) U) ~ I\.) ~ U) I\) :...J 0> .......
m (:) 0, ~ 0, ~ ~ N C/J n
<0 .p... CJ1 ....... -1.
(,.) co ~ (,.) 0> (X) U) 0> .a::... -l. ....... (J) ........ r-
." ~
-l. -1. =It -I
......... (X) 0> CJ1 co co -.J CD -l. co m (.,,) en c:
~ 0 ....... co co U) ~ -.....J .,J::a.. -... c.n (X) 0 )>
e )> r-
0 r- en
....lr. r- CD ~
0 -l. -l. -10. G')
~ co -10. 0> U1 ....... 00 m ......... 0 <0 ....... (J) !i: ........ c
co ~ U1 I\) -l. c.n -l. -.,J -...J ... 0 co U) CD -I
co N c..n (J) co co ~ I\J -10. -10. -l. -l. (,.) :xl ....... 0
0 ......... CJ.) I'\) c.n ~ 0 ....... -l. 0> .a::... c.n co en
C..> co tn CD 0 -l. co co ~ co 0 N <0 "'T1
0> W c..n 0 0 co (J) -... -....I I\) 0 0'1 W ."
=It ." ~
CJ.) ~ I\) Ul I\.) U) w w W 0'1 U) -l. en z
........ I\J -...J <0 ........ (J) ~ (J) co ~ U) ~ -I
U) I\) 0 CI) (.e.) U) I\) -l. <0 -:a.. (J) ~ 0
)> -I
0 r- 0
~ 0 CD 0
0 (,.) (,.) I\) (..) I\) (,.) I\) (,.) (,.) ~ 0'1 -l. ---a 0
0> <0 ~ ~ 0 0 ~ <0 -10. 01 00 0> <0 r ........
......... ~ .a:. co co ......... O't en N c.n co -... (..) !; CD c:
....... 0> 0 0 CD 0 tv co ......... co tv 0> l\) co Z
U) (J'J (X) co 0'1 ........ CD m ......... 00 co f\J CJ1
Co (:) ~ ~ ~ ~ 0'1 ~ 0 :::0 0
c.n -..J.. <0 -a.. en F
w U) ......... (J) I\) ~ .p... 0 0 ~ 0> (J) -l.
." ~
-l. ~ -:a.. =It .....
0 ....... 0 01 co co co co 0 <0 co en c
-J 01 U) I\) U) (.,,) 0 0 c..n -...J 0 0 )>
)> r-
C r- U'J
<0 -l. ..... ~ 0 CD :I:
.......
co co (J) -J ~ -J co -J co ..... ~ 0 r- ........ c:
~ (,.) ....... ~ ~ U) <0 en ........ --..J <0 --..J !; CD -f
c..n co 0) ....... <0 -J ........ -1. -l. -l. U) CD 0:>> 0
!=> 0 -...J (..) co 0 c.n ~ -l. (J) co ~ :::0
~ w ~ co W O't co Co (,.) co m -J fA II
a c..n (.-) ....... -...J ....... co ......... 0 I\) ~ f\J -n
-<
~
::u
-i
o
o
)>
-t
m
o
m
C
z
o
c
m
z
(')
-<
:::0
m
'1J
o
::u
-I
(
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST: APPROVE BILLS
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING 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.
SEPTEMBER 1 t 1998
ITEM NUMBER: 17
COMMENTS
j./
o1f~V
(~
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING 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:
SEPTEMBER 1, 1998
All Materials presented at publiC meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.