Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 12-01 ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1,1998 -7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL: X RON ANDERSON X CHARLIE ROUNTREE X GLENN BENTLEY X KEITH BIRD MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE CONSENT AGENDA A. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 17,1998: APPROVE B. RESOLUTION #205 - USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT (APPROVED 11/17/98) APPROVE RESOLUTION C. APPROVE BILLS: APPROVE REGULAR AGENDA 1. TABLED FROM NOVEMBER 17TH, 1998: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.8 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT- PORTION OF NW % SEC. 3, T.3N., R.1W: (APPROVE) 2. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL CARPET STORE BY CLAY HARTZ d/b/a FASHION FLOORS AND INTERIORS - 126 KING STREET: (APPROVE FINDINGS & ORDER OF DECISION - DENY CUP) 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR WHITESTONE ESTATES NO.3 BY WHITESTONE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC - SOUTH OF FRANKLIN RD & WEST OF LINDER RD: (APPROVE FINDINGS & ORDER OF DECISION) 4. FINAL PLAT FOR THOUSAND SPRINGS NO.1 SUBDIVISION BY FARWEST L.L.C. - NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE ROAD: (APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS) 5. FINAL PLAT FOR STETSON ESTATES BY JIM JEWETT - TEN MILE AND VICTORY ROAD: (APPROVE) 6. FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC - SW % SECTION 13 T. 3N., R. 1 W: (TABLE UNTIL DECEMBER 15,1998) '..... 7. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC -- NW % SECTION 5, T3N. R1 E: (ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 8. DISCUSSION OF RC WILLEY TILING OF DITCH: (APPROVE BONDING FOR TILING DITCH) 9. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF MERIDIAN CITY WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS ON TEN MILE ROAD BY LARRY E. HANSEN: (APPROVE) 10. WATER / SEWER 1 TRASH DELINQUENCIES: (APPROVE) 11. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. GARY SMITH: 1. LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT FOR SEWER LINE CROSSING ON VAN AUKER SEWER PROJECT (TABLE UNTIL DEC. 15, 1998) B. CHIEF BOWERS: 1. BUDGET CHANGES (APPROVE) C. SHARI STILES: 1. STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR COMP PLAN UPDATE (RECEIVED THREE STATEMENTS) 2. REQUEST BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT TO PLACE A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IN DAKOTA RIDGE SUB. (LOT 8, BLOCK 1) (SHARI TO INFORM TO MOVE TRAILER) D. TOM KUNTZ: 1. BUDGET LINE ITEM ADJUSTMENT / VEHICLE PURCHASE (APPROVE) 2. LINE ITEM TRANSFER (APPROVE) E. JANICE SMITH: ( 1. INVESTMENT - AGREEMENT WITH BUFFINGTON, MOORE AND MCNEIL (APPROVE FOR ONE YEAR) 2. BUDGET TRANSFER MUSS/ACCOUNTING (APPROVE) F. CHARLIE ROUNTREE 1. INSURANCE DISCUSSION (APPROVE PROPOSAL FROM BLUE SHIELD) MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 1, 1998 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. on December 1, 1998 by President Rountree. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Anderson, Keith Bird, Glenn Bentley, Charlie Rountree. OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Bill Gigray, Bill Gordon, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Malcolm McCoy. Rountree: First item on the agenda this evening is the consent agenda. Anybody wish to discuss those items. Anderson: I would make a motion that we approve all the items on the consent agenda. Bird: Seco.nd. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the items on the consent agenda. Is there any discussion? Hearing no discussion, all those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Rountree: Motion to approve the consent agenda passes unanimously. ITEM NO.1: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.8 BY STEINER DEVEL9PMENT - PORTION OF NW ~ SEC. 3, T.3N., R.1W: Rountree: Shari, do you have a report for us on what has transpired there? Stiles: Yes President Rountree, commissioners, I did meet with Doug Campbell at Steiner Development yesterday, Mr. Lovan, wasn't able to attend that meeting but I did meet with him this morning. It is my understanding that Mr. Lovan and Mr. Campbell have reached an agreement as to the tiling of the ditch and are working out possible land swap to their mutual benefit and that the ditch will be tiled. Rountree: Okay, any questions? Staff any discussion on this? You have the preliminary plat from last week, the item that is going to be-it was tabled because we had some concerns about whether or not that portion of the lateral adjacent to the subdivision would be tiled or whether or not it would be waved because of the size of the tile required and to work out some arrangements with the golf course. If I understand Shari correctly, the agreement is to tile the portion of the eight mile lateral adjacent to Lot 23, I believe. That Wally Lovan and Doug Campbell will work out arrangements to accommodate the golf course needs in terms of tiling and club house location on some type of property arrangements outside of the subdivision boundaries. Wally is here if you have any questions for him. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 2 Gigray: Mr. President and members of the council, for your consideration on any motion if you are going to make the motion for approval subject to conditions, just for clarification because we try to prepare an order as a follow-up to this is that we get information correct. Would we be referring to the conditions as stated under general comments and site specific comments of the Planning and Zoning Administrator and the City Engineer of October 7th ~ Stiles: That is the date of the comments from the public works department and planning and zoning~ Rountree: Okay, that will be correct~ Any other questions, comments? Bird: I have none. Bentley: None. Anderson: None~ Bentley: I would move that we approve the preliminary plat for the Lake at Cherry Lane NO.8 subject to the conditions of P & Z and staff of October 2nd and subject to agreements being worked out between Wally Lovan and Doug Campbell. Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the preliminary plat for Lake at Cherry Lane NO.8 subject conditions as stated, any discussion? Bentley: That should be October 7th. Bird: Not 2nd. Rountree: On the reference letter. It's been moved and seconded to approve plat Lake at Cherry Lane NO.8 subject conditions in the October 7th letter. Any discussion? Bird: None. Rountree: All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Rountree: Motion passed all in favor. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 3 ITEM NO.2 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS 0 F LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL CARPET STORE BY CLAY HARTZ d/b/a FASHION FLOORS AND INTERIORS - 126 KING STREET: Rountree: Do you have those findings of facts and conclusions? I know that you just received them, do you want to take a few minutes to run through those. Mr. Gigray? Gigray: Mr. President, members of the council, do you wish me to review those with you since you directed me to prepare them at the last meeting? Rountree: Is that your pleasure council, or do you just want to... Gigray: Thank you, Mr. President and members of the council, as a result of the action of the City Council at the last meeting I was directed to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law in conformance with your decisions which was a denial of the application for a special use permit. We have therefore prepared the findings. Those findings that you have in front of you include in the beginning the findings with regards to notice that was provided and is required under city and ordinance and state law and you find that it was done in accordance with those and those are specified in finding No. 2, finding NO.1 is just taking judicial notice of your own ordinances and Comprehensive Plan. Findings 3 has to do with who the applicant is, record owner is finding 4 the legal description for the property is 5 present land is subject property is residential is finding 6 the proposed use is for a floor covering store with parking area in front and behind the existing garage and so those are findings relative to the proposal. Present zoning in old town is finding 8 property is present occupancy by a home, a nicely landscaped and surrounded by residential use is finding no. 9, that has to do with existing conditions in the area. Finding 10 residents of the immediate neighborhood wish to keep the use of the premises residential and not place a retail store in the middle of a residential neighborhood. Finding 11 that all the property south of King Street between 1st and 2nd is residential except for the hub cap store which is east of 1st Street. Finding 12 has to do with retail stores are allowed in old town as a conditional use. Finding 13 is and this is an important one of your consideration, the proposed use will not be harmonious with and in accordance with a Comprehensive Plan. The subject request for conditional use proposed development relates and is in conflict with the goals and policies and provisions the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian as follows. Then you will see here in finding 13 the listing of numerous provisions of the Comprehensive Plan which are said out here which deal with either commercial development or commercial and retail in residential or next to residential areas and are provisions of the Comprehensive Plan of which form a basis or your decision of denial. Then the conclusions of law which follow that-those findings of fact of course deal with the appropriate state law and city ordinances that deal with your zoning and your conditional use authority and the Comprehensive Plan provisions, which are a part of this decision making. Then that is followed on page 8 by an order of decision of denial and then approval of that order of Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 4 decision of denial of course and then this is followed and I have extra pages here proposed a notice of final action which would be to the applicant and anyone else who would be interested to receive of this decision so they are aware of what their rights are with regards to seeking judicial review. This I would hand to the clerk because I'm not sure this notice is appended to this particular form I noticed as it went out. If you wish I could review the Comprehensive Planning provisions that are in part 11 here, but I think as you will see and as you go through there, I believe that supports the decision that you announce that you made at the last meeting, which was deny this application. Rountree: Thank you, any other questions? Bentley: Have none. Bird: I have none. Anderson: Have none. I make a motion that we approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in the order of the decision of denial in the matter of the application of Clayton Hartz d/b/a fashion floors and interiors at 126 King Street for an application for conditional use permit. Bentley: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with respect to denial. We need a roll call vote on that. Is there any discussion? ROLL CALL: Bird - yea, Anderson - yea, Bentley - yea. MOTION CARRIED: All yeas. ITEM NO.3: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR WHITESTONE ESTATES NO.3 BY WHITESTONE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC - SOUTH OF FRANKLIN RD & WEST OF LINDER RD: Rountree: Any questions, discussion on the Findings of Fact as prepared by legal counsel? Anderson: I have none. Bird: I have none. Bentley: I have none. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 5 Rountree: Okay, I'll entertain a motion. Anderson: I make a motion that we approve the. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in order of decision in the matter of the application of Whitestone Development for a variance and Whitestone Estates NO.3. Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Whitestone Development Company. Any discussion? Bentley: None. Bird: None. Rountree: Hearing none. ROLL CALL: Bird - yea, Bentley - yea, Anderson - yea. MOTION CARRIED: All yea. ITEM NO.4: FINAL PLAT FOR THOUSAND SPRINGS NO.1 SUBDIVISION BY FARWEST LLC - NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE ROAD: Rountree: Staff do you have any comments on that item? (Inaudible) Smith: Mr. President, council members, we did receive a response from the applicants engineer and their comments are acceptable as far as our comments are concerned, their response that is. We don't have any disagreements. Rountree: Any questions of staff or the applicant? Bird: Mr. President? Rountree: One of you two. Bird: Are we talking about the conditions on the November 30th, 1998 Gary? Stiles: Yes. Bird: Okay, thank you. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 6 Anderson: I make a motion that we approve the final plat for Thousand Springs NO.1 Subdivision by Farwest Development. Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to approve the final plat for Thousand Springs NO.1 Subdivision by Farwest LLC. Any discussion? Bird: Yeah, Ron did that include those conditions? Anderson: Yes. (Inaudible) Bird: I withdraw my second. Anderson: To include the comments and conditions of staff. Bird: I'll second that. Oh, put the date on. Rountree: November 30th. Bird: I'll second that now. Rountree: Motion has been amended to approve the final plat for Thousand Springs NO.1 Subdivision by Farwest subject conditions of the November 30th, 1998 letter from city staff. Any discussion? No discussion. All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO.5 FINAL PLAT FOR STETSON ESTATES BY JIM JEWETT - TEN MILE AND VICTORY ROAD: Rountree: Shari or Gary do you have any comments on that? Stiles: President Rountree, Councilman this is a subdivision that is in our area of impact. It's south of Victory Road off of Ten Mile. It is in an RT zone which requires a five acre minimum. The plat complies with our requirements except for the fact the cul- de-sac length exceed the maximum of our ordinance. In all other respects it complies with the city ordinance for that area. Rountree: Any comments Gary? Questions, discussion? Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 7 Bentley: Since this is in the area of impact, would they have to come before or talk to us about a variance for that block length? Stiles: I don't believe Ada County requires that they come to us for a variance, it's just that the plat does need to be approved by the city and will be signed by the city. Bentley: Thank you. Bird: Shari, did they reply to your comments on the 25th of 1998, November 25th? The general comments, site specific comments? Or do they need to when it's out like that? Stiles: We did request written response to our comments. I don't believe we've received the written response. My packet is not right. Rountree: Mr. Berg? Berg: Councilman Rountree, Councilman Bird, if you look on your packet that's for the previous item. Because there was no comments made by staff, written comments. Look on the cover sheet. Rountree: The cover page is labeled incorrectly. Anderson: This is the Landing. Stiles: The comments that we had made to the county were on the preliminary plat when they requested information. I can't remember if that did go before council. We did mention the fact that the cul-de-sac length exceeded our maximum and in that letter to the county we also stated that we would not require a re-subdivision plan or dry line sewers as is mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan. Rountree: Additional questions or comments? Bentley: So Shari, you are satisfied, your department is satisfied with this final plat. Stiles: Yes I am. Bird: I move that we accept the final plat for Stetson Estates by Jim Jewett on Ten Mile and Victory Road. Bentley: Second. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 8 Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to accept and approve the final plat for Stetson Estates, any discussion? All those in favor of the motion? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Rountree: All in favor. ITEM NO.6: FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC- SW % SECTION 13 T. 3N.,. R. 1W: Rountree: Staff any comments? Mr. Collins is back there to answer any questions I think. Is that correct? Smith: Mr. President, members of the council, as far as our records show we have not received a written response from the applicant on the comments that were offered dated November 25th, those were faxed to the applicants engineer that day. Rountree: Would you like Mr. Collins to address that? Smith: Please. DAVID COLLINS, 3350 AMERICANA TERRACE, BOISE. Collins: We received, or I received a fax of the memorandum of,25, November about 3:00 Wednesday afternoon before the turkey day. It was kind of, I didn't look them over thoroughly enough to see that this was a response in writing required prior to the council. I didn't read it, I saw that as a condition once you approved it, that we had to respond in .writing to them. We have no difficulty with the general comments, take exception to none of them. ON the site specific comments there is a couple of questions that my client requested that I bring to you. They deal with item no. 4 which reads "the Idaho Transportation Department in a letter regarding a development across the interstate commented that structure should not be any closer than 150 feet from the state right-of-way in areas of full (Inaudible) of access, which is a freeway configuration, or separation of 100 feet in all other areas". The question is, is this-it's a statement, it doesn't require anything of us, so far as I can see in reading it. If it doesn't, then the client would like to have that removed because it doesn't condition us to do anything, it just makes a statement that they sent a letter. We don't know what the development across was, but my recollection is that it's commercial directly across from the Landing there. NO.5 is documentation request regarding minimum house size-I won't read the entire thing, but this has to do with the compliance with the provisions of the previous ordinance under which the preliminary plat was approved, or compliance with the current ordinance in the R-4 zone as it exists today. In here it states that the previous legal council indicated that the property was zoned under a previous version of the r ( I 11,_ Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 9 ordinance, those ordinance provision should prevail. My developers attorney concurs with that-that we should be complying with the previous ordinance conditions under which the preliminary plat because we've kept the preliminary plat live and valid, we haven't allowed it to lapse. So those are the only two, everything else, we have no problem with what so ever. Typos will be corrected on the plat and all as usual. Rountree: Any questions? Bentley: Comments back to staff. Shari, do you have a response to those two items? Stiles: Councilman Bentley, Councilmen, no.4 because we did not get any response from the Idaho Transportation Department, I'm not sure that it was transmitted to them and whether they had an interest in commenting. Due the non-response we did take the comments we received about the Roaring Springs Waterpark and I would assume that those comments-maybe it's a false assumption but I would assume that the same would hold true no matter which side of the interstate that you are on. Number 5 we have requested minimum house sizes and have not received that information. There was discussion of the percentages that were presented. They never proposed percentages on the minimum house sizes, until we got to late phases of this project. It was never proposed in the preliminary plat stage. Only at the final plat stage. That is when they started designating the minimum house sizes. This project currently does not meet even the old ordinance provisions. There are numerous other items that need to be addressed and staff would fee much more comfortable if they would address these in writing and take care of some of the problems prior to your action on the plat. One thing that was not mentioned from the applicants representative, NO.3 is a particular concern. I would like to see some details on that berming that they are proposing, it should be made a common lot. There are extensive HUD and FHA standards that apply to any kind of funding/financing for those homes if they would propose to have that kind of financing and we would like to see that is a consistent treatment there, particularly since it's also an entrance corridor into the city. I'm not sure they can provide the proper line of site restriction barrier within a 25 foot wide area either. Rountree: Any other questions staff? Bentley: I don't have any more questions thank you. Bird: I have none. Rountree: Any discussion? Bentley: Yes, seems there is a couple of serious items here that need to be corrected in my estimation before we can act on this. One, I feel they need to developer and the ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 1 0 staff need to get together and work out these site specific comments and then respond in writing as the requirement for the final plat and my feelings would be to table this and see if they can get it worked out by the next meeting. Rountree: Would you like to make that a motion? We'd appreciate that. Bentley: I would move that we table the final plat for the Landing No. 11 for Mallard Landing LLC and request that the developer and staff get together and work out the disputes and site specific comments and have the developer respond in writing as required for the plat on the 15th of December. Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we table Item NO.6 the final plat for Landing No. 11 by Mallard Landing LLC until our next regularly scheduled meeting December 15th and that staff and applicant get together and resolve the outstanding comments that have not been resolved at this point. Any discussion? All those in favor of the motion? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Rountree: All in favor, motion passes. Next item on the agenda, David? Collins: My developer has not received the comments yet. So if you could direct staff to be sure the developer gets the copy. Rountree: They've just been faxed to you. Collins: Yes, and it didn't have a cover sheet to me either on it. So there was a little confusion (Inaudible). Stiles: There was a cover sheet included and the packets are available Friday prior to the meeting and are made available to the applicant. Rountree: We know there was a cover sheet because we have a copy of it, but if you (Inaudible). See that the developer got a copy. ITEM NO.7: VARIANCE FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC - NW ~ SECTION 5, T3N. R1 E: Rountree: Staff do you have any opening comments on this? ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 11 Stiles: President Rountree, Council members, you probably remember this as a very long process that we went through for approval of this subdivision. It's next to Vern Alleman's property, just east of Vern Alleman's property to-Vern Alleman's property is to the west of this and then Carol's Subdivision is to the east. I believe, I can't remember whether they had already received a one time extension or if they missed asking for the time extension. It seems like they had just missed asking for the time extension within the one year time period. They're asking for a variance from the requirement to submit a final plat on the project within one year of the approval of the preliminary plat. Shari, do you have any-Is the applicant or the applicant's representative here? Need to state your name and be sworn. PAT TEALEY, 915 W. JEFFERSON. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Tealey: My name is pat Tealey, Office address 915 W. Jefferson. I represent the applicant Pacific Northwest Electric and Edmonds Construction. The developer is asking for a time extension from the August 5th date which was the date that the preliminary-one year from the date that the preliminary plat was approved. We are not asking for any change to the conditions. If you remember some of you were on the council at the time. This is about 2 Y2 years of labor to get this approved, it would seem a little bit much to undo all that time and effort, because of an oversight by the developer. The developer was engaged during this time in the past year building the sewer trunk line, main line, through this approved preliminary plat. We had just completed it and it's been accepted by the City of Meridian within the last couple of weeks. There would be great financial hardship, of course to the developer if this time extension were to be denied. That is set forth (Inaudible) in our October 21 st letter which should be part of your packet where in we request the time extension. Again, there will be no change to the original conditions of the preliminary plat. All we are asking for is an extension of the extension of time from the August 5th date. Not from the hearing date of today. If there are any questions, I would be glad to answer. Rountree: Any questions? Bentley: I have none at this time. Rountree: Thank you Mr. Tealey. Anybody wishing to provide testimony in support of the application for variance? Anybody wishing to provide testimony in opposition to the request for variance. Mr. Alleman? VERN ALLEMAN, 2101 E. USTICK, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Alleman: Mr. Mayor and City Council, it is my understanding that the city has received information from the developers at Packard No.2, whereby they the developers will ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 12 change the three culverts they installed about November 15th in our irrigation ditch. These 12 inch culverts will be replaced with 18 inch culverts. Timing for this is indicated to be as soon as they can get the construction company back in to change this. I want to compliment the developers and Gary Smith and his staff for reaching this agreement. We have never approved the preliminary plat for our ditch which crosses Packard No.2. My information to you the City Council July 5th, 1997 indicated this and indicated the amount of water, 125 minor inches was the amount of water the place, the plan needed to be planned for. At this time, I was led to believe we didn't need to be concerned about this because the developers would be required to get our written approval before any changes were made. Such approval to be filed with construction drawing. I referred to ordinance 9-605-M2, which says no ditch pipe or structure for delivery of irrigation water or for carrying irrigation waste water shall be obstructed, rerouted, covered or changed in any way unless such obstruction rerouting, covering or change has first been approved in writing by the authorized representative of the persons owning the water rights, delivered or diverted by means of the ditch and/or the system operator. For the purpose of this section, person shall be defined as an irrigation district, ditch company, water users association, or water right holder. Should a person not have an authorized representative a determination of the majority of the holders of the water rights, shall be binding. A copy of such written approval, by such authorized representative or majority holders of the water shall-water rights, shall be filed with the construction drawings. In the event the developer can not obtain a response from said authorized representative approval will be assumed to be obtained if the developer meets the petitions as outlined in section 9-605-M6. In view of this and the problem with the culverts, I ask you to walk us through the process as to when, how and what we need to do in this matter to protect our water rights. In connection with this, I would like to enter for the record Ordinance entitled irrigation and drainage canals and ditches (Inaudible) sectjons 9-901, 9-902, 9-903 which are--9-901, it is hereby found that- intent and purpose, it is hereby found that water and irrigation are a (Inaudible) to property right within the city limits and these rights need to be protected and regulated. That it is the intent and purpose of this chapter to regulate the use and (Inaudible) of irrigation and drainage canals and ditches to ensure that each property owner and his property receives a full and lawful amount of water and the full amount of head and pressure. Section 9-902, maintenance of canals and ditches and embankments, it is hereby declared to be unlawful for any property owner of land through which an irrigation canal, ditch or drainage canal or ditch (Inaudible) such lines shall to fail to maintain in good order and repair any such canal or ditch that transverses through his property such that said canal or ditch is ready to transfer water. Additional such owner of the land through which such a canal or ditch transverses shall main the embankment there in good repair in order to prevent the water from wasting during the irrigation season and shall not at any time permit a greater quantity of water to be turned into said ditch or canal than the banks there will easily contain and can be used for beneficial use or useful purpose. Section 9-903, maintain as defined, for the purpose of this chapter, maintenance shall be defined as sufficient upkeep, repair, cleaning, debris removal, ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 13 weed removal, break or whole repair, rodent killing, or construction that is at a free flow of water maintained and a downstream user has a water head amount and pressure he is legally entitled to. In view of this and problems with the culverts, I ask you to walk us through the process as to when, how, and what we need to do in this matter to protect our water rights. In connection with this, I would like to enter for the record-I'm sorry I'm going back on that, I'm sorry. Rountree: We don't want you to repeat it Verno Alleman: I'm sorry, I lost my place. I have another concern with Packard No.2, this concerns weeds on this development. You may ask why I am concerned about this. One is the fear of fire, if these weeds catch fire, there is a good chance my haystacks would be lost because they are a few feet from the boarder of Packard NO.2. Number 2, noxious weeds, Canadian Thistle and others have gone to seed and this blows and spreads to surrounding properties, including mine. This is an ongoing problem. When these are allowed to mature and go to seed as they did last year, this becomes a very serious problem. I respectfully ask you to take action to correct these. I would appreciate if you would walk us through the process of where we go in protecting our rights. Rountree: Any questions? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Mr. Gigray had his hand up. Gigray: (Inaudible) Mr. President and members of council and for purposes of this gentleman's testimony, I would just offer this comment in terms of procedural information. As I understand what we have before us is an application for a variance request of what is city code section 119604F, which has to do with the requirement that there is a sense that preliminary plat approval of one year and less within that year period they make an application for a one year extension and the statute, rather the ordinance provides for a one year extension if they make a timely application, which has not been made. So, as I understand it what the council has to be considered with in this instance is not the specifics of the particular preliminary plat or it's approval or any of it's conditions, it's whether or not there are circumstances surrounding the failure to make the request in a timely manner and I have in front of you the criteria as to whether they meet those criteria in circumstances that would warrant granting a variance. I can imagine for many people getting notice of a public hearing of this request it gets kind of confusing as to what it is that is before the council. Rountree: Thank you Mr. Gigray, Mr. Bentley? (~ (-- Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 14 Bentley: Vern, I wanted to ask you, the ditches have been rerouted, is that what you are saying? Alleman: No, we never did approve the preliminary plat as-which they were supposed to get the approval from us in writing, and never have gotten it. So, it's not been presented to us and as I stated, we never approved them and yet the ordinance says they have to. They have to get our approval and it has to be in writing. Bentley: The ditch issue though, on the culverts, you are satisfied that they are going to be changed now? Alleman: Well, with what the staff told me, the information I got from the developer as of yesterday morning. I would like to still know how are we to-what are we to do when they don't abide by the provisions for preliminary plat approval? Bentley: That's part of what we've got to discuss here tonight is the extension of it. Alleman: Well, okay, but... Rountree: Mr. Bentley, there is a couple of issues here, but it's when, how and what. I can't answer specifically your question about your assumption that you have the authority, have been given the authority to approve the preliminary plat, I would have to ask staff if that is an agreement or something that we have in an ordinance. As far as the process, the when is when you recognize something is awry in whatever is going on out there, you need to notify the city. In this case, as it relates to preliminary plats, you did alert Gary Smith and the public works folks about your concerns with the irrigation piping. It appears that was a satisfactory engagement and you think you've got some resolution with the developer and-you don't think you have resolution with that? Alleman: Well, not on the preliminary plat... Rountree: No, I'm talking about the pipe size.. . (END OF TAPE) Rountree: ... the culvert size, okay and that's the issue you need to bring forth to the city. Whatever issue you have, or understanding that you have needs to be brought to the city so we can say yes that is a correct understanding and here is what we need now to do to effect that change and get the developer to agree what they have agreed to do. That's the responsibility of the city. So you need to notify the city of those instances. When is when you recognize that, how is that you bring it to the city and you bring whatever your issue is with the city and we will assist in resolving that. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 15 Alleman: Am I not doing that now? Saying that they didn't get the proper procedure? Rountree: You can do that any time, you don't have to wait for a public hearing. Alleman: I hope that it will be considered in this now being that I brought it up. Rountree: As far as the weeds go, we have a weeds ordinance in the city, this property has been annexed. Is that not correct that they are subject to that ordinance if they do have a weed problem. We recognize that they weeds are both issues that you brought up. You notify the city that it's a weed problem, we will notify the property owner that it's a problem, give them so many days to clean it up and then if they don't clean it up, we have a contract with an individual who does weed mowing for the city. So we will get it mowed and bill the property owner. Alleman: That was done last year and it still didn't solve the problem. Rountree: Well, you need to keep raising the issue. I see Shari is gone, so she will not be able to respond to that. That's what you need to do and that's our process. I would ask that don't wait for a public hearing, bring your issues before the city when you have an issue and get them resolved up front. Alleman: Being it hasn't been done here before, can we not do it now? Rountree: You can do it now, but this particular hearing as Mr. Gigray pointed out is not related to issues as it relates to the preliminary plat. It's related to the issues as the ordinance states, that the final plat has not been advanced and they have certain time to do that. They are asking a variance from that ordinance so we can authorize them to proceed on the basis of an already approved preliminary plat. Have that go carry on for another year as of their August date, not the issue of irrigation or weeds or those kind of things. Alleman: Well, we've got a plat that hasn't been approved properly though. Rountree: I don't know what the issue is there, I think that is an issue that you need to discuss with Gary. Do you understand what the issue is? Smith: Mr. President, council members we've talked with Vern in the past on the irrigation plan and he has made some suggestions which we've passed along to the developer as far as location of pipes. We've already had a process in the public works department that when the final development plans come forward for the development of the subdivisions, then we require the developer get approval from the downstream water users, or the irrigation district, whoever is responsible for the ditch. In that regard, Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 16 we require that they send out-I think it's a certified letter to the users so they know that we are asking them for their feedback. Rountree: Just for clarific-we are not at that point yet. Smith: Right, but we've always done that at the final plat process when the development plans are being done, when they are submitted. I don't know if the ordinance refers specifically to preliminary plats, I'm not aware of it. Preliminary plats are t6 show that type of information when they are submitted for approval. Obviously the preliminary plats are available for property owners to review and comment on. Rountree: We've already had the public hearings on that and gone on with the approval in August. Smith: Right, at the time that the preliminary plats are done, I don't know that there is a significant amount of engineering that has gone through to develop the piping plans, all the details for the piping plans. I think they show those sorts of things in general fashion, such as they do for the lots, the dimensions of the lots. They're in approximate dimension, say 100 foot deep by 80 foot wide and they may end up on the final plat to be 101 feet, 101.65 feet deep and 80.65 wide, so there is some details that come out on the final development plans that aren't included in the preliminary plat. That's the process that .we've taken in the past, that's what we've done to preserve the integrity of the system, the water system, so that it does deliver the water down stream, so there aren't problems. In that regard, we've taken some heat from the developers that we're taking responsibility away from the developer and their engineer to provide that water. They are responsible for that. The developers engineer puts his stamp on that plan and says this is appropriate engineering to transfer the water. They are responsible by state law to do that. What we try to do is be a mediator between the developer and his engineer and the downstream water users to make sure the water users do maintain their water rights. That's what we've done in the past, but we've always done that on the final plat at the final development stage. Alleman: I guess that my is that we don't get bypass and find out we come in too late. Rountree: I understand your concern about not getting your water on time. Alleman: Well, and coming into the plans too late and we haven't had our say and find out we are too late getting our say, so we are left out in the dark. Not knowing the process, that's where I'm coming from. Thank you. Rountree: Thank you Verno Anybody else wish to offer testimony and opposition to the variance? ( ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 17 ROBERTA THOMPSON, 2950 WINGATE, MERIDIAN, 10. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Thompson: I guess what I would need to do is offer opposition if that is the correct way to make some other facts be known. The reason why we are bringing this to this hearing, number one we were invited and kind of lead to believe that this is what this forum was for and also because even though the final plat is where all this takes place, the work has been done. Things have been done preliminary to the final, supposed to have happened. So that's why Mr. Alleman was here to talk to you about it because this was of urgency to this situation. I have some questions that I have for you gentlemen from the residents of Wingate Lane and I would just like to offer each of you a copy. I won't go through all of them in the time, but I want to refer to the March 11, 1997 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on page no. 12, article 19. I will read just a part of it, it says the applicants representative Pat Tealey responded to the comments from the public, which was public comment substantially as follows, one of the sections of this says the applicant will do whatever it can including entering into an agreement to ensure the delivery of irrigation water is not disrupted with regard to Wingate Lane, the applicant does not plan to access Wingate Lane in any way. With my questions, we have a situation that is occurring right now. Machinery and access vehicles, and different things that are being used for construction of this site, traveling up and down Wingate Lane, causing some great damage to it. We were under the understanding that that was not to be happening. I guess my question is why is this happening. What do we need to do where he has made this statement that they will not try to access it in any way. Access is traveling, there is also a situation where from east to west there is a small road being constructed across Wingate Lane, right over the top of there the utilities went where there is being some traffic back and forth across there, accessing both sides of this subdivision. That is against the agreement at the beginning. Also, it was agreed that we have fences, berms, and gates in place along Wingate Lane to keep there from being any access from any kind of traffic at all to go up and down the private lane and those are not in place and seems that construction has begun there, development has begun. So our questions are, we need to have maybe an answer to who enforces these provisions for private lane owners when developers once (Inaudible) once they are on record from previous City Council decisions. So these are previous decisions that have been made and documented and yet they are not being enforced or adhered to. So what-where do we come on that? We're not totally against the subdivision being there, but we are against the way in which it is being developed and things that have been infringed upon our area. It's not that we aren't willing to share, but it just doesn't work, because it's ruining the road, more than it would've been if this traffic had not been on it. There was one other little thing that I wanted to mention. In the meeting, the same meeting that this statement was made, there was a concern by the applicants as far as why would we worry about there being use by the residents of this subdivision on our lane. I think the fact that just arbitrarily this traffic is going up and down our lane now proves the fact that that would definitely ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 18 happen by any kind of residents. So my question to you along with these six questions that I have listed here, what kind of action can we expect and what should we do on this situation? Gigray: Mr. President and members of the council, for purpose of providing advice to the council, to the mayor with regards to response to the question, I would state that based on the representations that have been made by this particular witness a reference to a finding of fact in a previous action of the council is simple a finding with regards to what went on during the proceedings as I heard it characterized. It doesn't sound as if it's a particular aspect of any order of decision with regards to whatever action was taken and of course what would need to be reviewed would be a specific condition of approval before the city would have any ability to enforce any provisions, if in fact these property owners have a private lane of which they are only allowed to use, then they need to seek their counsel with regards to appropriate legal action to enforce the private right that they have, which would be some kind of injunctive relief against anyone else using that property who doesn't have a right to use it. As I understand it the city-this road if it's a private road isn't under the jurisdiction of the city or the Ada County Highway District, so that wouldn't be a matter in which the city could provide a remedy to that. My question would be simply to go with the honor and integrity of Mr. Tealey where he has made this statement and is not-possibly he is not the one responsible for that, but someone is. We have obtained-we don't have in our possession, but there have been notes to some of the drivers of these vehicles giving them the directions to come down Wingate Lane, so it's not just happening by accident. I can understand your comments on that, but because it is before the council as far as a variance, then we have to take whatever avenue that we can to be able to have this heard and have this situation taken care of. It was agreed and it was something that was provided for in the provisions of the preliminary plat that this would not take place. So I feel there is some responsibility on the councils part to make sure that does not happen. Does anybody have any answers? Bentley: Roberta, you do understand though that we don't enforce private roads. We don't have the authority to do that. Thompson: But it could stop with what the city does own. You could make sure that they stayed on the property that is with the city. Bentley: The problem is that we don't the authority to stop them from using that road. Thompson: But you have the authority to make sure that they have the fences and gates up? Bentley: Yes, that part is part of... ( ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 19 Thompson: That's not happening, so if the fences and gates were up, we wouldn't have to worry about the enforcement. So we don't need to be on the defense here, I feeL Bentley: No, but I just want to make sure what the council said that this is actually heading toward a private legal matter. Thompson: I understand that, but I feel that is somewhat irrelevant, because if the other things are in place this situation won't even occur. We won't have to worry about anything like that. So what can we do about getting that done? Bentley: That's what we will be discussing. Thompson: Okay, I appreciate that. Gigray: Mr. President and members of the council, for purpose of providing information of the question raised by this witness. If the property owners out there have specific information with regards to a violation of some kind of approval that the city has made as a condition or whatever they should present that evidence to the staff for the investigation. If we have an investigation (Inaudible) and then we have the authority to do something about it if we get the appropriate report then we can... Thompson: It is of record though, so whose responsibility? Do we just bring back the record to you and say this is what you said and please do it. Gigray: I would say it'd be akin to someone who maybe was involved in some kind-a victim of a crime, they have to provide information that the investigating offices about what occurred and what evidence would support that it happened and so on and so forth. So it's a matter, you folks feel there has been a violation of some kind of action on the city has acted on, provide the information to the staff so they can look into that and then they would I assume refer it to our office for whatever enforcement action we take. Thompson: Did I somewhat do that, already where I brought it to your attention that this was happening? Gigray: This is testimony... Thompson: I totally understand that. If in fact we have to disagree with the variance, to be able to be heard on the other matters, that is what we are doing. Rountree: I guess an answer to your question is how do you address the issues that you feel you have and felt are not being enforced. If you bring to the city either by a visit, phone call, or by a letter an instance that says, my understanding is the following Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 20 conditions were implied on this development. By observation, these things are not occurring. If you notify the city of that, then what Mr. Gigray is saying is that staff will work through the legal office to do whatever enforcement the city can whether it's a stop work order, sitting down with the developer and saying look these are the conditions that you agreed to, you need to abide by what you have agreed to do. If it's not a condition as Mr. Gigray pointed out in any kind of approval process, then we have nothing to enforce. So you needn't wait again as I said to Mr. Alleman for a public hearing. Point it out to the city, when you first know of it. Thompson: We have sent two letters, September 9th, and I believe November 15th, no response from those letters, so I think we did that. Rountree: So I guess my next response is I've been waiting to say this, just call the mayor. Bentley: No, we have them. Rountree: We have them. (Inaudible) if you would take a seat please. Thompson: I definitely don't, I would like this to work for them as much as we would like for it to work for us. We just feel like we need to make sure that this is done with integrity and the way they had said they would do it. Rountree: I guess my final comment back to you is that I appreciate that you're not getting response from city hall and that's important for the council to know. We don't work in the city hall, we work here a couple nights a week or month. Thompson: (Inaudible) if we don't get answers to the letter, we have to bring our bodies. Rountree: I appreciate that, we need to know that and that's good to know. We will see if we can't get some responses to you. Anybody else? DON BRYANT, 2070 N LOCUST GROVE RD, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. Bryant: The reason why I'm here is to follow up, I realize this is just a variance, a request for variance on the plat, on the preliminary plat. From what I'm following up on what Mr. Alleman was discussing on his problems with these burying ditches, this tile sizing, the upkeep of open ditches, when these things get extended therein lies a problem. These extensions get going and nobody takes care of the ditches. I have an agreement with the developer that if there is anything, if the ditch isn't taken care of I make a call to city hall, they stop all the permits or whatever unless that ditch is taken ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 21 care of, until that ditch is taken care of, which I want to reiterate at this time. He has so far, the farmer, Mr. Acshenbrenner who has been taking care of the land to the east has been keeping the ditches open. He has already buried, I don't know if it's in Packard 1 or Packard 2, he's already buried a portion of the tile or of the ditch (Inaudible) tile and the developed part. When Gary stated the process in which all this happens, the problem is right there, we have a preliminary plat the developer starts his work, he puts all the ground work in, nothing has been improved. All they have to go by is the engineering. The engineering is either done or it isn't done. I've seen both cases. When they approve the final plat, they say this is what they have. Okay, that's fine, it should work, but if it doesn't work, what do you do? That was the case with me as all of you a long time members well know, that I had problems downstream of mine being undersized and that is why I'm here tonight. The problem is the enforcement and the inspections, I don't know the process of when they put the tile in the ditch, who inspects it, who approves it, where are the (Inaudible). I had a problem when I came before you three months ago, a problem with flooding. I worked with Gary, I worked with everybody down here, I tried to resolve the problems and see what the deal was. I had trouble working with the city. I got little response. Told Gary that I would handle it from my end and I got a hold of Acshenbrenner the farmer. He and I, he mainly took care of the problem. He found the clog, it was down stream. Ada County was worthless, Nampa/Meridian got a rota-rooter out there and it was a tree root in the culvert, or in the line underneath the road. It got taken care of. When I asked the developers for the Avest Property in Dove Meadows for as-builts and the city for-I don't know if I asked Gary if he had any or not. I asked for as-builts for all the stuff that was in the ground on the irrigation lines and nobody had any. The only ones that I come up with are the ones that I kept from the initial instruction. They didn't have anything from the Dove Meadows and the one on the other side of that. I had the only two as-builts that we went by and what was going on. There's-somewhere along the line things need to be changed or you are going to get property owners in here at a forum that they are not supposed to be singing the blues like I am because of a variance-because of things that are being done that they know is wrong, but this isn't the proper forum to talk about it. I guess that's the end. The End. Do you have any questions? It's a problem and I don't know the answer. There is something that is going to have to be done between the preliminary plat and the final plat because during the preliminary plat phase, everything goes in the ground. The engineer draws it up and says this is what you have and it should work. I was never contacted, the only person that contacted me when they developed the four or five subdivisions around me was Roger Alan from Avest, when they did next door. When I came in here on all the previous, numerous public hearings that I've been in, they all said yeah we are going to meet with the property owners, we are going to talk about what their needs are, we are going to take care of everything they want us to take care of. Everything is perfect in Meridianville and everyone lives happily ever after. I'm done again. Rountree: You are done again? Thank you Don. Anyone else wish to offer testimony? (- (" Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 22 JEFF KEESAR, 3020 WINGATE LANE, MERIDIAN, 10. WAS SWORN IN BY THE A TIORNEY. Keesar: I will be real brief. I just moved to Wingate Lane two months ago and was aware of subdivision that was going in. Since that time, I've realized there is quite a history to the Wingate Lane that I can attest I'm far from up to speed on. I'll try and keep my comments to the variance at hand. I guess from what I'm hearing even from some of my neighbors and what I would express to you is that it's hard to move forward on this subdivision without there being some form of compliance on the part of the developer. There should be some caution on allowing the variance I think where they have not done what they have said they would do. I'll just leave-that's kind of an open end and that's too general. I will speak specifically to what I know. I've got four little kids and this lane is what attracted us the most was that it was a private lane. I don't know if you've seen it but it's a little dirt road single car wide and we are the first house on there. The oldest of my kids is seven. The gentleman representing the developer kind of chuckled back there when it was mentioned that the road is being used, like you've got to be kidding me. Well I'm here to tell you, my wife is home everyday with four little kids and it's being used. I'm not opposed to the subdivision, so I don't want the developer to think that, or you to think that. It can't be every truck shape, size, company has used this road and that's really-to grant a variance without there being some form of-you folks need to play by the rules and again I know that you said you can't enforce, it's not your job, you can't tell them to not use the road, but you can say this can be a conditional variance. I mean you comply with what you said you'll do and we will grant the variance. Until then, you know, from water to kids to-play by the rules. The fact that we have to potentially get legal help and we may need to do that. You know, I can't do my own taxes anymore, let alone come in here and talk about land laws and road access and maybe that's the best way to do it, but you know, good grief. There ought to be a way that we can still as homeowners come before you without having to come in with attorneys, but maybe not. I've got an accountant to do my taxes. Anyway, that's it unless there is any questions. Rountree: Anyone else? Mr. Sharp? DALE SHARP, 2445 WINGATE LANE, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE A TIORNEY. Sharp: Since we just did this, I would like to bring this up that-my understanding that the council meetings and the Planning and Zoning Council meeting is a way the system that we use to negotiate concerns between the city and the developers and the citizens. It's right here in your ordinance and so forth. During these meetings we swore to tell the truth and everything. This hasn't happened, I think as far as the developer is concerned. I just spent a little time here at city hall today just picking out a few { II Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 23 highlights and Mr. Tealey there will (Inaudible) note on the face of the plat that says no access from any (Inaudible) subdivision to Wingate Lane. That is one of the requirements of the highway district. This information is readily available. Another one, Mr. Tealey, Wingate Lane will remain private areas as I stated, no access from this subdivision to Wingate. Here is another one, district staff recognized that Wingate Lane was privately owned and that the district would not participate in any condemnation proceedings for acquisition of the lane, this is the highway district. So, this is a few of the things, this is not happening because where I live it's readily obvious and I just yesterday think I saw a pickup drive down across the lane, drive around the other part of the subdivision over on the west side, back over, cross back through there and this happens daily. This is a private lane. It's been established that, in fact, this is from the Ad.8 County Planning and Zoning Commission this is readily available to anybody who wants to read it. It says that there is a private road dated 1913 (Inaudible) county. We have that and it's been recorded and notarized on record. Our house was built in 1915 the same time this lane was notarized and recorded as a private lane. That is on record here too. As far as-first thing we noticed that they said they wouldn't use this lane, here comes Tealey's Survey Crew down there in pickups and everything. Then pretty soon, we had pickups and cars and everything else going back across the lane (Inaudible). They said well, I asked them why are they doing this, you are not supposed to be using the lane. Well, they have authority to do it from the land owners. Well, they have negated their right to use this lane because the Ada County Planning and Zoning said there would be no more houses on this lane. That means no more access from this lane for houses. They sold off the Borup (sic) Property which had access. That left that part of the other lane-land they don't have access. They sold off the Brown property, so that part. Then the Brown and Borup property become part of the subdivision, that's part of the city, so they don't have access anymore. It's just a-like I say, this system they say that it's conditions that we negotiate and agree to and the City Council takes this into consideration and approves based on these things. So we are saying that City Council should be enforcing these provisions by putting a fence and gates across these, so they don't have access to this lane. While I'm at it, I'll reiterate what Vern has to say as far as the weeds. We are getting a hell of a lot of weeds coming from that one Packard Subdivision NO.1 blowing into our property. You can come out there and see it today. I don't think I've put up with it. As far as people, we have a Wingate Lane road association that we put in wanting to keep this lane up and we can't do it when we have all these trucks and vehicles that we feel are unauthorized. These conditions should be met. They should Mr. Tealey, speaking on the behalf of the developers that this lane would not be used and it is open today. You can drive right across there and back and forth, they are using it. So anyway, we have notified City Council when we notice things coming up, September 9th, like we say we got this letter. I don't know if this is part of the public records here, because I didn't see it in any of the minutes I saw today. I do wish to have these ~ntered in as public record. So there (Inaudible). ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 24 Bentley: We've got them. Rountree: Do you want these as testimony? (I naud ible) Sparks: As far as the-on the irrigation pipes so forth, I did call in on and was assured that we would have an opportunity to prove and so forth before anything was done before the final. Low and behold, we got culverts in there that was too small. What they will say now-if we said-if we didn't say it now, bring this to you guys attention. I didn't bring-I called Gary Smith on it. If we didn't do that, pursuant something else done. All of this work would be done and they say well we can't go back and change it now. We want on record that we are opposing this, unless they comply to what they swore to in these minutes. Any questions? Rountree: Anyone else wish to offer testimony. Mrs. Sharp. HELEN SHARP, 2445 WINGATE LANE, MERIDIAN, ID. WAS SWORN IN BY THE ATTORNEY. H. Sharp: One of the things that I think we are forgetting too is that lane is posted, private lane authorized vehicles only. Obviously that is being ignored. Another thing that was brought up and they said that Ada County Highway wouldn't have any jurisdiction on our private lane and for those of us who went to several meetings with Ada County Highway who got involved in his. We will probably have a good argument there. The thing-the one argument that we've heard and I've talked to Americore and I've talked to our new attorney-welcome aboard-that since the developer owners land on either side of the lane, east and west, he wants to cross. If he crosses fine, but the equipment can't cross because if the equipment crosses that section it then becomes public. That part of the lane becomes public. With easement that was written way back 1913 and I'm sure we've gone to the interpretation of that and to me even with our forefathers who had written that their intention was if you live on Wingate Lane, you have the option of getting onto Ustick Road, so you can get to and from your properties and I don't think there is anyway that you can interpret that any differently. Nobody is trying to stop that. Like they say, we're talking about an extension of a variance and rather than hash this over, and over again because of hardships, if it's not granted the hardships were brought on by themselves if they don't comply. If we had the fences and the berms that were promised, we wouldn't have the problem of crossing Wingate Lane, we wouldn't have problem with cars going back and forth because they would have to go in where they are supposed to. We've had contractors trucks and the equipment say we don't want to drive all the way around. Well, unfortunately that's what happened when you get involved with a situation like this. So rather than drag this on forever, I would go along with it, but I think only to extend it if they comply with what Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 25 they agreed to, to begin with. They have not done that. As far as our attorney says, you are the City Council, you just make these decisions you haven't the authority to enforce it, our question is who does? If you make the decision they can have it. Rountree: Anyone else wish to offer testimony? Mr. Tealey, would you like to offer some final comments. Tealey: Do you want me to answer any of that? Rountree: If you would address the questions and answer the questions that council might have. Tealey: Mr. Alleman first brought up the issue of the ditch that supplies water to him. We constructed the main line sewer that serves Packard No.1, it goes through this area called Packard No.2. We are not developing at this time Packard NO.2. The sewer that we put in there serves Packard NO.1 so we get sewer out of there to the lift station. When we go and actually develop Packard NO.2 in phases we will then comply with all of the requirements of the preliminary plat, such as the gates, berming, fences and the piping of the irrigation ditches. The irrigation ditch that Mr. Alleman referred to-there are three, 20 foot section of pipe that we put in the ditch that supplies water to him. These go underneath the dirt road that is required by the City of Meridian to go over the top. It's a maintenance road for that sewer that we put in. There are three 20 foot section of pipe that they are talking about that we put in. We originally had on our plans that they were 12 inch pipes and that's what the contractor put in. We engineered these, they will flow in those short sections 125 minors inches. However, we were made aware of by the City of Meridian and this does show that the process does work, evidently Mr. Alleman or Mr. Sharp, I don't know who it is that came into the city and said look these 12 inch pipes don't work and their temporary pipes. These are just pipes that are put in there until we actually do the final development of the Packard NO.2 Subdivision and it was made aware to us by a conversation with the Meridian Engineering Department, specifically Bruce. I assume he is directed by whomever at the City to give us a call. We wrote a letter back on November 20th that says this fax is a response to your call about culverts for the irrigation crossings of the maintenance road for Packard sewer extension. The developer is going to replace the 12 inch culverts with 18 inch culverts. Although we feel the 12 inch crossings are adequate, we realize that Mr. Alleman the adjacent owner is uncomfortable with the size of the pipe. We do not wish to have another sore point with the neighbors on the project or this issue. The 18 inch replacement pipes are definitely more than adequate to handle the 125 miners inches. The pipe will be replaced as soon we can reasonably get the contractor back on the site. I believe if they go out to that ditch, those three crossings tomorrow, they'll find 18 inch pipes in the place. So I believe the process does work and the City of Meridian has referred their comments to us and we have taken the appropriate action. In regards to the weeds, we've mowed it twice this year. There is Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 26 an ordinance. We are in the city. We are annexed to the city. They have code enforcement. If we don't get out there in a timely fashion to cut the weeds, the code enforcement person will call us and we'll have to do it or as you said you have a contract with somebody who will do it for us and bill us. We have done it twice this year. We specifically met in a pre-construction meeting with the contractor, (Inaudible) construction. We specifically warned him about access to Wingate Lane. We told him in no way should you access or use Wingate Lane in order to deliver supplies, to have your workers go up and down there to get to the project. We felt we did a good job of specifically warning them. If there are violations, I guess all we could do is apologize for that. We made that effort. My trucks went up there once, because you can't get into that project when it first started up because they fenced off all the access from Chamberlain Estates. We went up Wingate Lane once and Mr. Sharp met us about half way, and we turned down into our project and parked the truck and did our work and went back out Wingate Lane. Anytime after that, the only way we got access after that was to tear down a portion of the fence on Cham ice Street, park on Chamice and walk through that portion of the fence that we took down. That's how we controlled our \ people out there. Mr. (Inaudible) was fully aware that Wingate Lane was an issue and we warned him not to do it. If they have to enforce something, then they should enforce it. We will give it our best effort to make sure that none of our - all the contractors on this project are warned, forewarned, and Mr. Fulfer knew for sure on this one because he's been part of this project for almost a year trying to get this sewer okayed that there was a problem with Wingate and access was a problem. I don't know how to control that. We tried to control it. Is there any other comments? I'm glad to address them, some that I missed. Bentley: Well I've sat through just about all this on this project and it has been long and it has been drawn out. Some of these people that live on Wingate made it very evident all through the hearing process about the problems they feel because it's a self funded road. And I think they've pretty much shown tonight that not all your contractors are paying any attention, especially if they've got maps detailing them going up Wingate and I think you really need to get your subs together and get them lined out on these issues. The water issues that if you've got the 18 inch culverts in that's fine. But this project has drug on and we've had some long nights here over Wingate Lane, and I just can't believe that all these trips are being made without somebody outside of the people living there knowing it. I just find that hard to believe that these contractors aren't following up, so I think you're going to have to bring them in. Tealey: We specifically had pre-construction meetings. The only contractor that's been out there has been Spirit Construction. We specifically had meetings with him and we warned him numerous times that no access to Wingate Lane. We're not providing maps to get there. I mean I don't know. We don't give them maps (inaudible) go use Wingate Lane. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 27 Bentley: I don't know where it's coming from. Maybe it's coming from their own people involved, but it's evident that this is what they gave testimony tonight that that has been the case. That's all I have. Bird: I have none. Anderson: I guess just a comment to follow up and it seems like these vehicles using Wingate Lane has been the real sore spot with lots of people. And obviously word of mouth telling the contractors is not working, so I guess just a comment would be sounds like you guys need to go out there and construct some type of a barrier that will keep these vehicles from going up and down that road and that's the only message that these delivery drivers are going to understand because if you've got a contractor the word isn't going to filter down to everybody that delivers a piece of equipment or supply out there. So you're going to have to do something more substantial to take care of that. Posting signs, creating barriers, whatever it's going to take and not just word of mouth. Tealey: Mr. Anderson if you'd go out to the project, that might prove to be a little difficult. The access to Wingate Lane is off of Ustick, so if we tried to put any gate or barrier there, that would deny access to all the people along - Anderson: Well at the end of Wingate or however you get into your subdivision would be where I'd put it. Tealey: Evidently it's along Ustick. Maybe I'm not correct on that. I don't know. Again I don't know about the traffic. I can't go out there. My job isn't to control the traffic. We made an honest effort. If it's a point of concern, we'll make more of an effort. We'll print warnings to all the contractors out there. Maybe that's the way to do it so that we prove that we can make the effort. Anything we can do we don't want these people mad at us. I'm using we in a collective term. I don't mean to include myself as being the developer on this thing. I have many other projects that I'm concerned with and I can't go out and patrol Wingate Lane. But I can certainly influence the developer in trying to control it. Maybe something along the line of fliers to any contractors that's suppose to go out there, you cannot use Wingate Lane. We've guaranteed these people in meetings that we're not going to access this thing. Another thing thought that guarantee that we're going to access and I know it's on the plat, that is meant when this thing is built out that there will be no access from this subdivision on to Wingate Lane and that's where that statement was made, and that note will appear on the plats when we get to that stage, but right now we're trying to get there, and we made a mistake. We didn't get the time extension in. We were I guess - again I'm using that term collectively. The developer was occupied with getting this sewer in. This (End of Tape) Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 28 Bird:.. those big trucks have to back out once or twice. They won't come down there again. Tealey: I don't know how they are getting there. I assume they are getting access off of Ustick. Bird: You have to get access off of Ustick, but these people don't want them traveling down Wingate. How are they getting on to your property down there? Tealey: The developers own on both sides of Ustick. Bird: Yes, I understand that. Tealey: So evidently they are coming from Ustick down Wingate and then going into it. Bird: But the agreement was we wouldn't encourage commercial vehicles to be using Wingate during this. Tealey: Right and we warned the contractors about that. Bird: Okay, that property could be fenced, bermed or something so they couldn't get over it. Am I not right? So they get down there and they get a dead end. They either back up if they got a big truck with a big piece of dozer or something on it. They'll only back out of there once, and then they'll get in the right way. Right? I think that can be taken care of and I think that's these people's real concerns and I understand that. I didn't sit on the Council but I think Ron and I in our pre Council sittings here listened to a lot of this and that was a major concern out there. I think if we make an agreement, we got to live with it. I know you guys are trying. Short of holding their monies whoever paying if they hold their money if they drive down there, that will get their attention real fast. But right now the thing is we're asking for a variance on the plat. So really a lot of this testimony don't have a thing to do with it other than be good neighbors. Tealey: The traffic should stop. The sewer project is done, and where they were crossing the original fencing will be put back up. Bird: I think if that stops you get rid of 90010 of your opposition. When you start developing it, get the berms and stuff in, then they're not going to be able to come down there. Tealey: I agree. Bird: I don't what Wingate - if I was a citizen on Wingate and it's been discussed, I'd go to the police and find out what I can do or get a gated entry. I guess that would be one ( Meridian City Council December 1 J 1998 Page 29 thing you do is put up a gate. Then they couldn't get in. But anyway we're looking at a variance extension on the plat. Rountree: Keith, the public hearing is still open so if you want to discuss, keep discussing, but we - Bird: No, problem. I'm done. Rountree: Any more questions for Mr. Tealey? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I have none. Anderson: No. Rountree: Any more testimony? And this is breaking our normal format. We usually get one, but go ahead. Alleman: I just wanted to clarify what Mr. Tealey's testimony was. He said they had mowed that twice. That is not true. They mowed part of it one time and part of it another time. They did not mow all of it twice. We had a problem with the City telling them what to do and they were going to do it and never got there, and by the time they got there, the weeds, Canadian Thistle, had all matured and blown off. The other thing, he said that that was planned for twelve inch on that. It is not all on 12 inch. The upper end of that is 15 inch so his statements are not true. I just wanted to clarify what he was saying. Rountree: Let's not get into a debate here. I think that there's misunderstanding of what was heard and I heard something different than what Mr. Alleman heard. Tealey: Obviously there is a misunderstanding here. I don't- Gigray: For a matter of procedure you're going to have a difficult record transcribing - Rountree: You need to identify your name. Anybody else wish to testify? DIXIE ROBERTS 2855 WINGATE LANE WAS SWORN BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. Roberts: My concern of course is the road and the part we're talking about is the lateral. We going south to north, and we wanted that gated, so that there wasn't access on to Wingate Lane. And that's the part not from Ustick, but it's down the lane is where they've been crossing. Also I've been real concerned about the irrigation about the size Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 30 of the pipe. Really I think a lot of it's been answered already, but that's the main concern. If they get that pipe in there, it isn't the correct size. How do we get it changed? They say well you know this is on the plat and you know all this such and such, and then they want to leave it. They don't want to take the time and the expense to change things. And then where are we? We're left with a mess. And that's what our concern is. If we can get things established ahead of time, it's better I think. Thank you. Rountree: Does it relate to the variance? Is it something new? (Inaudible) Rountree: Please come forward and state your name. DALE SHARP 2445 WINGATE LANE Sharp: Yes, I just wanted to clarify. Mr. Bird I think understands what we're saying, but it's not only north and south traversing on the lane, it's east and west where they cross over, where they've been crossing over from one part of the Packard Subdivision 2 over the west side, so we need to have that - something there that will preclude people from using that. Not only it's people that come out of the subdivision and driving through there and on down the way and so forth, but that's alii wanted to say. Rountree: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing. Need a motion to close the public hearing. Bird: I move we close the public hearing. Bentley: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and second to close the public hearing. All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bird: I've got a question for staff. What is our policy? Do we send out letters or anything the time is coming up on these plats? Do we send out letters to remind them or anything like that? Gigray: Mr. President, just a matter of procedure. If you're going to ask staff questions, I would recommend that the public hearing remain open. Bird: Oh, I thought this was discussion. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 31 Gigray: You're getting more information - Bird: No problem, no problem. I won't ask because I think I already know. Rountree: You know the answer. Bird: Yeah, I already know. Rountree: Any other discussion? What's your pleasure? Bird: Mr. Gigray I believe that any action on this would require Findings. Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, that is absolutely correct. This is a public hearing and variances required Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision, and I have just for a procedural aspects, I have this worksheet in front of you which prescribes for agenda item number 7 you'll see request for variance. That simply follows your ordinances as it relates to the kinds of Findings that you have to make in order to grant variances, because the criteria here as you'll see where it says deliberation and possible action by the Council is the items that deal directly with variances. Then once you've decided on how you feel about that then you just direct me to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order in accordance with your deliberation. Bird: I move that we have the legal counsel get the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law regarding this public hearing. Bentley: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we have legal counsel prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on the request for variance for Packard Subdivision No. 2. Any discussion? Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council, I'll need some direction with regards to how you wish to decide this in terms of whether you feel the criteria of the ordinance has been met by the evidence that has been produced at this hearing or whether or not it has not. Rountree: We could have a second motion to that or withdraw - Bird: I'll withdraw. He withdraw and I'll make a new motion. I move that we the City Council approves the variance extension and has the legal department get the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 32 Bentley: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to prepare Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law with a favorable decision as it relates to the request for variance for Packard Sub. NO.2. Any discussion? Bentley: I have a question for the rest of the Council. And then for the attorney. Would it be appropriate to apply conditions to this? Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council, there is clearly evidence that this particular developer needs to have a variance in order to have this preliminary plat extended or it will fail and they will have to start over. I would recommend if you were going to apply conditions for the granting of the variance that those conditions be such that would work in terms of the field and in terms of the process of this development, and I assume that you're looking at issues involving access to Wingate Road and possibly I don't know whether or not you're thinking about any tiling or irrigation issues or weed control issues. But if you plan on any conditions in there, I would suggest that you put a time table on which certain improvements would be placed and possibly even the matter brought back for report that those have been complied with or that the preliminary plat would fail, which might mean that I just would recommend that you put at time table on it if you're going to go that direction. Bird: Mr. President I got a question. Don't our preliminary plat have all those conditions on it? Do we make conditions upon conditions? If we extend this preliminary plat then we make sure that it's adhered to right? I mean I realize we probably do need a time limit on it, but we're getting conditions on top of conditions. Gigray: I'm just saying that as I understand it if you grant an extension and this extension goes for another year probably from the date and that probably ought to be clarified from the motion that the extension would go from the date in which it would be under the ordinance which means from August 5th to August 5th of '99. I guess if you have some concern with the immediacy with road access to Wingate, you could condition that the approval of the variance subject to the developer placing obstructions to Wingate Road by a certain time table or that variance wouldn't be granted, which means if it wasn't done in that period of time someone could come in and move or find that the preliminary plat has failed because the variance conditions aren't met. If you are going to put conditions. That's what I'm saying. There's some difficulty in doing that because we get into what are the conditions, how do you enforce them and so on. Bird: I would leave my motion as it is. Bentley: I understand what Councilman Bird is saying and what the attorney is saying and I agree with it. These conditions were already once applied to the preliminary plat. ( ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 33 I would just state that I hope Mr. Tealey and the developer and the builder takes to heart what has been said tonight and the problems and the citings of previous commitments and make a conserted effort to get these problems resolved, because as part of the preliminary plat the proceedings can be stopped as the City Attorney has stated. So with that that's alii have. Rountree: Other discussion? Bird: I have none. Anderson: I guess I just wanted to comment too that I have some concerns also and I agree with what the neighbors are saying, and I think a much more conserted effort needs to take place on the part of the developer to block off the access so that those vehicles can't go through there, and I think it's imperative before any more work continues on the property that they do something about the access problem because that's the biggest concern that the neighbors are voicing here and I again would like to add more conditions to it, but again we're adding more conditions to conditions and I would be one that would strongly support shutting down the project if these things don't start getting complied with here. Rountree: Any other comments? Bentley: Call for a question. Rountree: Questions been called. All those in favor of the motion? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Gigray: Mr. President, just a matte of procedure. I would report with those Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Approval at the next Council meeting, December 15th if that be correct. Rountree: Yes. Bentley: Mr. President, I move we take a ten minute recess. Bird: I second it. Rountree: Moved and seconded that we take a ten minute recess. In favor? TEM MINUTE RECESS ITEM NO.8: DISCUSSION OF RC WILLEY TILING OF DITCH: Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 34 Rountree: We'll call the December 1st session back in order. If people would take their seats. The next item on the agenda is item number 8, discussion of the RC Willey tiling of ditch. Bird: When we approved the plat or anything did we require tiling of that? Rountree: Question for Gary Smith. Smith: Mr. President, Council members, I don't have the ordinance if there was one, but I can read the minutes from the September 1st meeting, the motion if you would like. Bird: No, we have that. That's no problem. Smith: As I understood it, the motion was that the ditch was to be tiled subject to the diameter of the pipe being 48 inches or less as determined by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District, and subsequently they have submitted to us stating that a 36 inch diameter pipe is adequate. So at this point and after receiving that letter, then we required the architect who is preparing the site plan to show that ditch would be pipe, which they have done. I received a call from Mr. Marv Jensen from RC Willey today, and I didn't get a chance to get back to him, but he was asking the question of being able to supply a bond of some kind, a financial guarantee to the City of Meridian that they will install the pipe when other property owners on the ditch elsewhere either upstream or downstream also pipe the ditch. But that wasn't the motion that was made and approved. Rountree: Anything else? Bentley: Two issues to do with this. One I thought we had discussion on the possibility of bonding since nobody else had tiled the ditch or there wasn't any other process in place for this, and secondly at an APA meeting here last month there was a gentleman there from the Department of Water Resources and I posed the question to him. What are we doing to our shallow aquifer by tiling all these ditches? I said is this not the way that these aquifers recharge and his response was yes. We are doing damage by tiling all these ditches. I think we need to take a look at some of this. This ditch that involves RC Willey's is along the railroad right-af-way. It's a stretch that all Canyon County and Ada County is talking abaut trying to preserve the right-af-way. Maybe there's a chance since this is a I believe a run off ditch that there's a chance that we could possibly preserve this into a waterway along this if we did get the railroad right-of-way along here. So my feeling is if we did anything we just bond for it at this time, but I really think we need to take a look at all these ditches we're filling in. With all the farmland we're taking out af circulation and all the flood irrigation that's going away. I realize our water ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 35 is out of the deep aquifer but if the shallow goes away, everybody is going to be in the deep and we're going to be in deep. So that's my only comment on that. Rountree: Any discussion? Bird: I believe we got the (Inaudible) if anybody has got any questions. Rountree: Did anybody have questions for the applicant? Bird: Has anybody got questions for the applicant? Rountree: Councilmen? Bird: Mr. President, I don't have any questions for him. I would like to concur with Glenn. I think if I remember right we waived tiling the ditch across the street there; didn't we? Across Eagle Road, didn't we - oh, we didn't require that to be - Smith: No, not that I'm aware of. The only property that we're talking about over there is that annexation request isn't it? Bird: Yeah. Smith: Or Wheel City or whatever it's called. Yes, I don't recall that that was waived for them. Could say for sure. Bird: I for one would like to go along with Glenn and have a discussion on this. I don't even know if we need to have it bonded if whatever the procedure is with the City. I have no problem with that. I think we need to look at these tiling of ditches on a basis of each individual application. I think that we could be hurting our aquifer a little bit, in fact quite a bit. So I would hope we could work something out between the staff and RC Willey and about tiling and holding off on tiling that. Bentley: Follow up to that Keith and I think maybe legal and staff may have to chime in on this. As I said I don't think we can progress without giving this gentleman some direction. I donlt think we can say go ahead and do it. We're not going to have you tile it at this time. Then come back later and find out we've changed our mind. We want ditches tiled and the next guy tiles and he doesn't, so I think the answer is probably going to be put up the bond and if we don't need to exercise that bond, then you can retire the bond out or refund it or whatever the correct term is on it. But I think we need to give direction on this project as to which way we are going to go as far as either bonding it or we're going to say we're not going to ditch any of it, and I don't think anybody sitting here is ready to make that determination that we're going to stop tiling that ditch. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 36 Rountree: You need any discussion? Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council answer to Councilman Bentley's question, I guess I'm a little bit amiss of exactly what is before is I see is the heading of discussion of RC Willey tiling of ditch, and I don't know are we talking about a waiver of the requirement to tile under section 11-9-605M; is that what we're talking about or is this just to answer you question, I am just not sure where we are in the process here. Stiles: President Rountree, Council members, the tiling of the ditch is a requirement of the annexation and there was a preliminary plat but that is not being pursued at this time. It was the annexation requirement to comply with the tiling of ditch requirement. Apparently Ron Van Auker is investigating tiling that entire section. It is extremely deep and very steep. It's not an amenity. I mean it's not currently designed to be used as an amenity. It is a safety problem if you had people walking adjacent to it. It appears that the majority of the water that's in this at least from I have looked quite a length up and down this drain is groundwater coming up, and it was a little surprising to me even though I don't know much about sizes of pipes that Nampa Meridian could ascertain that that only required a 36 inch pipe, because you can see on the level of the banks that there's a big fluctuation in the water there, and there are geese and ducks and that's probably something that we need to look at, but in order for RC Willey to get an occupancy certificate, they would have to have those improvements completed or at least have a bond in place for 1200/0 of those required improvements in order to get that certificate of occupancy. I don't know if they are asking for anything other than that they be allowed to bond that. Staff was at a loss to tell them okay it's fine with the bond, because of the direction you had taken on the variance is that what the decision actually was at the Council level, and I think mostly we wanted a clarification of Council. Anderson: I guess a comment I kind of agree with what Glenn is saying here. I think at this point what needs to be done is we need to have some more in depth discussions maybe in a strategic planning meeting about what we want to do with ditches and whether we want to keep some open ditches or not and I would be willing to accept a bond at this point in lieu of actually tiling the ditch for them to get their occupancy permit, move forward with the project. Rountree: Any other questions, comments? I have a question for Shari. Shari, did this require a 404 permit from the Core of Engineers to do alteration to this? It sounds to me like it's a permanent water body. It flows year round. (Inaudible) Rountree: That's okay, I just wanted to know that. ( (~- Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 37 Gigray: This isn't a public hearing, Mr. President. You may have him identify himself so that when they do the minutes - Lowe: I'm Jerry Lowe with CSHQA Architects representing RC Willey. It is a drainage ditch, Evans Drainage Ditch which is controlled through an easement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and as far as I'm aware there are no other federal or state entities that have any interest in this body. Rountree: Have we ever heard from the Core on that matter Gary because they - well it doesn't matter whose jurisdiction because if they claim it a water of the U.S., they can require a permit. Smith: We've had to deal with 404 permits on Nine Mile Drain, which it's under the jurisdiction of the irrigation district also, but it's still the Core of Engineers. Five Mile Drain, we've had to go through Core of Engineers for crossings there for sewer and water and again that's under the jurisdiction for maintenance of the irrigation district. So I can't answer your question specifically Councilman Rountree, but it sure seems like past history would indicate that 404 would be involved in below the water level. Rountree: And it may very well be difficult to get one for compliance with the City ordinance that requires tiling of ditches if they have control over the water. Smith: We did have a problem with - or we weren't allowed to tile Nine Mile Drain because the Core said that's an open drain. That needs to stay open. They wouldn't allow it to be tiled even though it was tilable. Rountree: And I guess the point that Shari made is if it is dealing with ground water it was built for other purposes besides delivery of irrigation water. It's actually keeping us from being a wet land. Smith: Yes, it is a drain. All of the ditches that we've been informed by Nampa Meridian Irrigation District that all of the ditches crossing through Meridian area are titled as drains. None of them are creeks. They're all drains. The low ditches, not the irrigation ditches, but the low ditches are all drains, and they were built for that reason. If any of these ditches are piped, then they shouldn't be hard piped. They should be piped such that they could accept groundwater. Either through perforations in the pipes or open joints, however it might be done, but they are a drainage ditch. I think if you get into that ditch and start messing around below the high water level, you are going to be talking to the Core of Engineers. Lowe: While I'm here, may I make a plea? Rountree: A plea? ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 38 Lowe: I appreciate what you're saying is that the urgency of trying to bring this to resolution. The owner is amenable to the bond. We've had discussions with the Mayor for the past 60 days alluding to that type of thing would like to bring it to if that's the' conclusion to allow us to obtain a building permit and proceed with the project. Rountree: Okay thank you. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. Bentley: I have none. Bird: I move that we temporarily waive the tiling of the ditch behind RC Willey, and for them to put up a bond as required to tile ditch at later date at 1200ib above cost; is that right. That's my motion. Bentley: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to have the applicant post a bond in the amount of 1200/0 cost of tiling the - don't have the name of the ditch. Evans Drain. Moved and seconded to do that. Any discussion? All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO.9: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF MERIDIAN CITY WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS ON TEN MILE ROAD BY LARRY E. HANSEN: Rountree: Is Mr. Hansen here to explain the request? Hansen: My name is Larry Hansen. I reside at 1888 E. Rodeo Lane in Kuna, and I'm available to answer any questions that you may have. I don't know if you have the information in front of you as to what we're requesting or not. Rountree: Any questions for Mr. Hansen? Bird: I have none. Anderson: None. Hansen: I would like to sate if I may that we've worked with staff for about four months now on this project even though it's outside of Meridian City limits. We're more than happy to sign any kind of an annexation letter in the future if you would request so. We appreciate staff's input into this. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 39 Bentley: So your plans are to annex into the city? Hansen: When possible. We're not contiguous to city limits at this time. Bentley: Right, thank you. Question for staff. Gary, your thoughts and input please? Smith: Mr. President and Council members I have talked to Larry and Russ about this project and we don't have any concerns with the demand that will be placed on our system. It's primarily a fire flow requirement from the fire department I believe. The actual domestic water use on site will be very limited at this point. With the project that they are proposing to build, which is a self storage units. Anderson: The question I have Gary is how is this different than us extending our water mains out north of town, and we've had a lot of discussion in that and not being able to do that unless we can extend sewer lines at the same time. So how is this different? Smith: I guess it's a little different in that the sewer usage on this project is very minimal. As I understand it there's one residence there that they already have or in the process of getting approval from Central District for a septic tank. Like I said earlier the water demand is a fire flow requirement. They have agreed to and understand the double assessment requirement of which we don't have an assessment fire flow. We have an assessment for domestic use. There's a flat fee per month that's charged for a fire line if it's run to a commercial building. I guess that we're on the edge of having to make a decision and this is something that we've discussed a little bit about providing city service outside the city limits and whether or not this is the avenue you want to pursue as far as development is concerned. Because right now, you're right, we've tried to keep services limited to properties that are contiguous to the city limits or that are or can be annexed within a short period of time. We've stepped outside of that concept a couple of time and in fact we have one small subdivision that's still served by sewer and water that's not in the city limits that could be. But it's built out now and I think there's ten lots maybe in it. But I think this is an aspect of development of our impact area that you need to consider as to whether you want to proceed with this type of idea for development. I think this is kind of opening the door for that type of process that would allow development outside the city limits the corporate boundaries even though at present the ordinance says it's allowable by approval of the City Council and the user will be assessed a double connection fee for both sewer and water. Anderson: Where would this water line come from? This property is at Ten Mile and Franklin? Smith: The piece that they are proposing to develop now is just south of the railroad tracks and north of Ten Mile Drain. It's where Stevens has their home and there's a mobile home there for a hired hand and there's a hay shed where they've stored hay. Meridian City Council December 1 J 1998 Page 40 Anderson: So this would require boring under the railroad tracks? Smith: Yes, it will. Anderson: And it would extend off of Pine Street or where's the water right now? Smith: It will come from - I'm trying to think of the name of the subdivision that Blaser is doing right now. Thunder something. Rountree: On Ten Mile? Smith: Yes Ten Mile Road. Bird: How far down is the line there Gary? Smith: Well they are bringing it to their south boundary right now. I don't know how many feet that is from there to the railroad. Bird: And Larry and them takes this on down to Charlie's place down there? Smith: Yes. Bird: It's between the house and the railroad track that land in there that they're developing? Smith: Yes, it's kind of a triangular piece. Their north boundary lays up against the railroad right-of-way and then - Bird: How far is our sewer away from there? Smith: A long ways. Farther than I can throw a rock. It's- Bird: It's coming down to the sub isn't it? Smith: I think it's farther than you can shoot a rifle in fact. Right now the sewer that would serve that property is our Black Cat lift station. That's where the sewer line would have to come from to serve this property. Bird: A mile and a half. Smith: Yes, at least. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 41 Rountree: Any other questions? Bentley: I have none. Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, you might inquire of the developer or of staff Gary Smith as to whether this parcel is greater than five acres that will be served by this water. I would strongly recommend that and I believe the developer said they'd be willing to do it that they condition that providing the service they agree to be annexed into the City at such time as they could be annexed, because if it's a parcel greater than five acre, that could pose a problem. I don't know if it is or not. Hansen: The parcel that we're proposing is greater than five acres. I might also mention that we have made an agreement with Stevens to acquire their entire 80 acre parcel, and we will be cleaning up that entire corner. Although we have no plans of developing that in the near future, but again as I've indicated all along we have no problem at all signing a future annexation request in whatever format that you have. Gigray: I might recommend Mr. President with your permission that we might want to fashion some kind of agreement by which this water service would be provided to this property. We might need to have and I would want Gary's input on this, what parcel would be served by it. Are we talking about a whole 80 acres or is this one parcel one part of it and then we could outline all the terms and conditions by which that service would be provided and bring that back before the Council. This evening you could maybe take an action directing us to do that. It could get this moving. Hansen: I might be able if I may interject a little bit here. We have actually split the Stevens property into two separate parcels. And when I indicate that we have acquired the entire 80 acres, it is now in two separate parcels. One is a 13 acre parcel that goes down to the hay barn if you are familiar with the property and lies along the Ten Mile Drain up to the railroad tracks. That is the parcel that the application is before you to service. And again fire and one resident manager and that's what is before you and no application to include the other parcel so we wouldn't have a problem at this point in time limiting it to that one parcel. Anderson: One more question to Gary. I guess thinking ahead a little bit then eventually we're going to have sewer, eventually we're going to have more subdivisions down there. What size line are we going to put to go down to service this one piece of property and are we going to have to dig it up in a few year to put a larger line. Smith: We would have a 12 inch line installed. This extension would be 12 inch in diameter, and that's what we're running on section line roads typically everywhere outside of the line coming out of our new tanker. That will be larger, but typically we're 12 inch in all the section line roads, and that's what this would be so there will be a lot Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 42 more water capacity in this line than what that 13 acres would require especially under this development as a storage area. Rountree: Anything else? Bird: I have none. Gigray: Does the developer put it in? Smith: Yes, and we would have - at least they have the option to approach City Council and ask for approval of latecomers agreement on that length of pipe. It would be up to the Council's decision as to whether that's approved, but that is available through the ordinance. Rountree: Thanks Gary. Anything else? Bird: I have none. Rountree: Any motion? Bird: I move that we grant this request for an extension of the Meridian City water services to the 13 acres on N. Ten Mile Road just south of the tracks, railroad tracks and that the developer to pay for the extension. Anderson: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded to grant the extension of Meridian City water to the described parcel. Any discussion? Bentley: Mr. Bird are we going to include the double hookup fee assessment and are we going to make this part of the - by the agreement? Bird: I believe this is by ordinance, isn't it the double hookup fee, but do we need it in the motion? If we do - Bentley: What we've done in the past we've included it in the motion but also the fact that upon annexation we can receive one half of the hookup fee back. Or do we want to put that in conditions to work out? Rountree: Mr. Bentley, all I'm saying is I want to put that in your memory banks. Bird: I want it this way. I.don't want to have to remember anything. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 43 Bird: Yeah, that could be with the addition of the agreement of the annexation. Bentley: Right, that would suit me. Bird: Okay. Rountree: Motion stands. Any other discussion? It's been moved and seconded as motion's stated. All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ITEM NO. 10: WATER I SEWER / TRASH DELINQUENCIES: Rountree: Is there anyone present who wishes to contest their water, sewer and trash delinquency? Bentley is protesting. He never has paid I don't think. Bentley: Check's in the mail. Rountree: You are hereby informed you may appear or have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho Code. Even though you appeal, your water maybe shut off and the amount of this turn off list is $32,449.57. (End of Tape) Bentley: Mr. President, I move that we approve the water delinquency and turn off list. Bird: I second that. Rountree: Moved and seconded that we approve the water and sewer delinquency turn off list. All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Bird: Mr. President, while we're still on this item, can I ask something? How many actually do we turn off, because this $32,000 is a lot of bucks. Rountree: Well it was $66,000 last month. Bird: I know it was $66,000 last month. Now that we got- Anderson: Very little. They almost all pay in the few days. Bird: Is that right Gary? Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 44 Smith: I don't remember who did the research Councilman Bird, but the amount that is actually turned off is percentage wise is pretty small compared to what's on the turn off list and I think maybe Will or Pauline - I don't know who did it, but some months ago there was kind of a little history run on just that question, and I don't have it with me. Berg: Mr. President and members of the Council we did have a spreadsheet on the back every month that told us how the months fall and how much we actually approved to turn off and how much we do turn off when it comes black Wednesday and it is substantially lower, but I will find out where that sheet is and why it's not attached to the back so that you have that record, but it is a lot different than what we approved. Bird: I would certainly appreciate that. Berg: And we do have people in the past that I've been here that do come up and protest their bill and we make particular situations to accommodate them. Anderson: I have a comment or question. This list is always printed by account number which really means nothing to us, and if you wanted to look up somebody whose name like if I wanted to see if I was delinquent for example, I have to thumb through all the pages. Would it not be easy just to index this just by alphabetical order maybe for the Council reports? Skeggs: It's sent to the water department by account number because that's how they shut it off in sequence, and if it was in alpha order, we would have resort it just to give it to them in order to shut off. That's why it's done through account number, and we averaged about 80-100 turn ofts when I was managing that department, and normally you would start off with 500 and something so by the time shut off, it averaged between 80 to 100 actual turn ofts. Anderson: I guess I understand them shutting it off, but I mean for the report to Council, would it not be an easy matter just to ask it to print out one index by alphabetically order? Skeggs: We would have to resort it and then resort it again in order to give it to the water department, but that's something we can check with - Rountree: If you want it that way, we can get it that way. It's going to be - (I naud ible) Anderson: I was asking if it was something easy to do. Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 45 Bird: You have more time than they do. Anderson: If it was in Excel, all you'd have to do is punch - Skeggs: Yeah, it's in Microsoft Works right now, but I mean if you wanted it like that we could just have them - if it would be easier to read. Anderson: No, I don't want to make waves. Bentley: Another tree died. Rountree: It's not waves. If you want a report like that, we can get it. I agree it would be easier to read. ITEM NO. 11: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. GARY SMITH: 1. LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT FOR SEWER LINE CROSSING ON VAN AUKER SEWER PROJECT. Smith: Mr. President and Council members the license agreement for that crossing of by the way Evans Drain, I had reviewed that and sent it back to the attorney for Nampa Meridian with the request for some revisions which he acknowledged it needed to have done, and he called me as late as this morning saying that he still hadn't sent that me. Obviously I didn't have it so I don't have that and didn't have that to submit to anyone for review. He indicated that he would be bringing that with him when they meet with us on Thursday to discuss the pathway agreements. So I'll have it then. I'll request your indulgence in tabling this item until sometime in the future. December the 15th would be all right. That's obviously - I will have it for sure by Thursday. Rountree: Gary would it not be just a easy to remove this from the agenda and you put it back on at such time as you have the agreement? Smith: Well you could if you'd like, but I was assured I'd have it Thursday. He would bring it with him. Bird: Mr. President I move that we table license agreement with Nampa Meridian IrriQation District for the sewer line crossing on Van Auker sewer project until December 15tn. Bentley: Second. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 46 Rountree: It's been moved and second that we table the license agreement with Nampa Meridian Irrigation District. All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. B. CHIEF BOWERS: 1. BUDGET CHANGES Bowers: Mr. President Rountree and City Council, I was suppose to be here a couple of weeks ago. I didn't realize that. I'm sorry. We have not approved my budget to my knowledge at this time. There was some questions. Charlie had some questions about how much money the rural commissioners was going to put in for a truck. And also the final total from the rural, how much that would be. I believe I put those in your boxes. It's been quite a while ago, so are there any other questions on that budget change or anything? Ron and I got to talking today. We couldn't remember what they all were. Rountree: You answered mine. I don't know if anybody else had any other questions. Any other questions? Bird: I have none. You answered them Kenny. You answered mine. Rountree: While you are here, maybe not on that particular item, but what's the status of concept for the new fire station? Bowers: Everything is running along real good Mr. President. December 9th I believe we have openings from the architects. Anderson: We'll have proposals from all the architects that we sent out request for proposals. Rountree: Okay so you got the RP's out and they are on the - Bowers: Yes, they are out at this time. I want to thank Gary Smith. His crew has helped us tremendously. Brad has helped us a bunch, so I really appreciate it Gary on that part, getting us rolling and trying to tell us what needs to be done. Rountree: Any other questions on Kenny's budget? Or anything else? Bentley: Just for discussion sake and maybe this is something we need to put together at a planning session. I'd like to see us take a look and we have to sure discuss this ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 47 with the rural too take a look at starting to put plans together for the Ten Mile station and the feasibility of how soon we can plan on moving on erecting that. Bowers: Mr. Bentley, we have been discussing that in our meetings. What we would like to do if everything works out with the building that we have now and all the dates are met and everything is kosher, that we will be starting the second station or the substation within a year of this main station being built. We don't quite know yet if that's the best area for a fire station after talking with Doug Young from the rating bureau. We might want to move it a little bit closer to Cherry Lane if possible for our mileage for the rating, but Mr. Anderson has been discussing that also with the rural commissioners. Bentley: I got a question for Mr. Rountree. I can't remember. Were there conditions put on the city with that property for the fire station? Rountree: I couldn't tell you. I've never seen the deed. Bentley: Question for Gary. Do you recall? Smith: I don't know Councilman Bentley. I remember that there were - it almost seems like there was. Bentley: I believe there was, and I think that's something we have to look at before we abandoned the site. Smith: It was something kind of gift I believe from Mr. Teeter and his family. Bentley: Right and I think it was a dedicated gift for a fire station. Smith: I think you're right. Rountree: It could be. That's pretty typical. Anderson: We had some questions on that. We'd never seen anything. Bentley: Maybe you can round up the paperwork on that and research that because it's something that will definitely play into the plans. Bowers: Exactly. We were going to get right into that when we get dealt into it a little deeper. We were going to check and see if that was for a well site or dedicated strictly for a fire station or if the city was able to sell it and go somewhere else, and that will be pretty tough until we get the paperwork to see. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 48 Gigray: Mr. President, members of the Council, Chief, we can get a copy of the deed. Does anyone recall whether or not there was any kind of official action on the part of the council accepting the deed? If there was then we'd look at those too. Rountree: There hasn't been any. The Council has asked the question and there has never been officially presented the deed. Gigray: One of the things I recommend in the future anything that is dedicated to the City whether a gift or otherwise, I recommend that even if it's ratification after recording or whatever that you should reserve the authority to accept those dedications so you know what you are getting. I've seen this in other places where the developers have tried to dedicate bridges across canals that have been a mess and so we just have kind of said unless we accept it, we don't - Rountree: It's a good idea. Bowers: Yeah, I'm not really sure, Bill, if it's even dedicated yet. I haven't seen any paperwork on it just hearsay. (Inaudible) Bowers: And Charlie knows and Mr. Bentley knows too that we've been told we had this piece of property for a long time and we never did really have it. Rountree: That's correct. Bowers: So we might not yet. Bentley: It's my understanding the deed is in the house. But I don't know where. Bird: It should be recorded if we got it. Rountree: Will should have it. Berg: For Teeter? Got it. Bowers: Any other questions then? Bentley: That's alii had. Thank you. Rountree: Need a motion on the budget. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 49 Bentley: We've already accepted the budget. I guess all you need to do is clear up the questions. Anderson: Mr. President I make a motion that we approve the fire department's budget and lift any restrictions that were on the budget. Bentley: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we go forth with the fire department budget and remove any restrictions. All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. C. SHARI STILES: 1. STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR COMP PLAN UPDATE 2. REQUEST BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT TO PLACE A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IN DAKOTA RIDGE SUB. (LOT 8, BLOCK 1) Stiles: President Rountree, Council members we received three statements of qualifications on our request for update of the Comprehensive Plan on the 20th. The firms responding were JUS Engineers, SAle, and Carl Olson. I talked to Charlie earlier today about how he thought we might want to proceed on this, and with your approval we would like to set up an interview group to listen to either two or all three of the firms responding and then offer our recommendations to you. I didn't know if any of you had any desire to be on that interview team. It's kind of a toss up between two of them at least for me between two of them right now, but I think the interview will pretty much firm up our ideas of who we want to go with in that process. If you have any suggestions on who you would involved in part of that, let me know. Rountree: Questions? Bird: I have no desire to be on it or anything. Gigray: Mr. President and members of the Council, I would strongly recommend that someone on the City Councilor the Mayor or someone from this body be part of that process because I think what Shari is doing here is a very good thing to get the kind of expertise to help with the development of the Comprehensive Plan. I think it would be good to have someone from Planning and Zoning Commission on that because these people will provide a lot of direction on how this is updated and it's a document that ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 50 really drives your zoning and all of your land use planning and maybe even someone from Public Works could at least sit in on that so they're comfortable with it as well because we're dealing with impact areas and a lot of city utilities and what not, and so I think this is no small thing, and it would be a real important decision. Bentley: When are they meeting on this? I mean times of day or is this something they arrange? Stiles: We haven't set up any times with them yet. Malcolm is very interested and wants to participate in the interview process. Gary just indicated that he would be willing to do that. I think the Mayor would probably at least be willing to do that. We could set it up either during the day or after work. Bentley: Yeah, depending on the hours, I might be able to attend. Bird: What do you guys think of - I think maybe even a representative from the police and fire would help~ If they would like to sit on something like that. You know the Comprehensive Plan, the pubic safety is probably the priority of any Comprehensive Plan I would imagine. It wouldn't hurt to have four or five people on that interview committee. The more you have the more ideas you get. I think it's very good to have Planning and Zoning, Council, yourself, Gary, whoever would help~ What do you think of that? Anderson: I was just going to offer my services to serve on that committee if nobody else wanted to do that. Rountree: I'd just point out that we did something very similar to this when we selected ZGA for the space study. There was a panel of P & Z, City Council, Mayor, Will, Gary was on it and that worked very well. I guess I'm a little concerned that we get it too big, it gets a little unwieldy. Somewhere between four and six is probably sufficient. If Glenn and Ron want to participate, in my opinion, is sufficient participation from the Council. I don't know that you need a motion for direction. I think that's the right way to go. Take the lead. You're the department head and get a committee put together. You got a couple of volunteers here. Stiles: Okay we would like to get that set up as soon as possible so that we can start negotiations on a contract and get them started. So I'll be contacting you and see what times are available. Bird: Charlie how formal do you want to be? Is this something that you need to appoint a committee or is Shari going to go ask people to participate? ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 51 Rountree: I think we just recognized the group. It wasn't that formal. I think your general consensus that this is the right way to go. I would recommend we let the department head take the lead on it. That's her business, and if you want anybody to review your criteria and your rating, I do that a lot. I'd be glad to offer that service to you. You want to just fax it to me or e-mail me or something. Stiles: We do have like a matrix set up that has those different percentages. The next item, I don't know why they left. Steiner Development has placed another sales office out on the Dakota Ridge property without asking any kind of permission or permits. Their letter is a little misleading calling it a construction trailer. It's really a sales office. They just went out and plopped it down. It's not hooked up to sewer or water. I don't know what they are doing for those kinds of services, but- Bird: Shari let me ask you a question. Their letter and I don't know who Cheryl Sable is Stiles: She's in the Public Works Department. Bird: It says a construction trailer. Stiles: It's not a construction trailer. (Inaudible) Bird: I have no problem with a construction trailer on there. It's done all the time. We need it and even small people need it. But if it's a sales office, then something needs to be done. Stiles: It is a sales office. Rountree: Is it both? Bird: It couldn't be both Charlie. If it's a construction, it's filled with construction equipment and it's used as overseeing construction. Stiles: He had a realtor in there. It's exactly what they did - Bird: It's a sales office. Stiles: Yes. It's exactly what they did at lake at Cherry Lane. Bird: Is it 40 footer? ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 52 Stiles: I don't know if you ever saw it out there. It used to sitting where right next to where the fire station lot is out there. Rountree: It used to be right on Ten Mile. Stiles: Yeah. And that was a case where he just plopped it out there without any kind of a permit. Rountree: No, that's a sales office. I agree with Shari. Bentley: Do you have a code officer? Stiles: Yeah. Bird: Send him out there and get him out there. Rountree: Or he can apply for a conditional use permit. Stiles: I mean he didn't come in and get any kind of permit. I would assume that he needs a building permit to erect something like that even on a temporary basis. Does he? (I naud ible) Stiles: He had it set up right there on Ten Mile and then he moved it further into the development on the Teeter Street until the people in the subdivision complained. They were sick of looking at it so he just picked it up and plopped it out there now. Rountree: Most outfits build a home and use that for their sales office, then sell it later. Stiles: Okay, I'll let him know. Bird: If he's using it as a sales office, he isn't hooked up to water, sewer and electricity? Stiles: Well he maybe hooked up to electricity but I'm sure he hasn't had permit from Idaho Power to do that either. Because even to do that he would have to go through the city to get the permit. Bird: Does he have an outdoor lavatory? Stiles: No. (I naud ible) (' Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 53 Stiles: Thank you. D. TOM KUNTZ: 1. BUDGET LINE ITEM ADJUSTMENT / VEHICLE PURCHASE Kuntz: At your request we took three of our four antique parks vehicles to the Musick and Sons Auction in November and received a total of $2566 for the three vehicles. Bentley: Somebody got hosed. Kuntz: Actually one vehicle went for $1600. It's a collector's item. And what" I'm asking for is that money you allow me to use that money to offset the expense of the water department used vehicle that we picked up about a week ago. Bird: Wasn't this Ford Ranger in your original budget? Kuntz: No. Anderson: Didn't we authorize the purchase of a pick up or something like that? Was one of those purchase or is this that purchase? Kuntz: You authorized the purchase of a one ton that has been purchased and authorization of a smaller new vehicle which has not been purchased because we're waiting for the state bids to come out. Then you authorized $4,000 to go towards another used vehicle that we purchased about three months ago. Bird: How many vehicles Tom? I'm going back lhrough and I can't remember? How many vehicles did we authorize you to buy this year? Kuntz: Three. Bird: And we got rid of four? Kuntz: Correct. It was either that or put new brakes on the fourth one. Bird: How many you got now? Kuntz: Vehicles that we're using? We have the one ton, the 91 Ford, which we got from the water department in the summer and the little Ford Ranger, so three vehicles is ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 54 what we are running right now and we have the fourth antique but we (inaudible) all new brakes all the way around. Bird: Is that all that is lacking on that one? Kuntz: The antique? No, sir. But that would allow us to at least put it on the street if we could stop it. Anderson: The one ton, is that that one that has the dump bed on it? Kuntz: Yes, sir. Anderson: Question for the other Council members to add money back in there, is this not a one time budget adjustment because you are adding money to the budget. It's not a line item transfer. Rountree: I don't know. We might need an explanation from Janice or Will, but it's a unexpected revenue. Normally it would probably just go in the general fund. In this case what Tom is asking is instead it go to the general fund, it go to the water department to offset the - Bird: No, it's going into his budget which is like Ron says is a budget adjustment Charlie. We give him so much money last year and we didn't - Rountree: It would land in his budget long enough to go to the water department to pay for the small pick up. Bird: We understand that, but this is a budget adjustment. You're adding money to his budget. Bentley: I would think probably the simplest way to do this would be to let the money go into the general fund and then do a budget adjustment at the end of the year for the cost of the Ranger. I think the paper trail would be a lot cleaner. Bird: That's what we did last year. Bentley: We can sit here and just approve him go ahead and picking up this truck and then at the end of the year do the budget adjustment when we do the blanket adjustments. Rountree: One time. Bird: One time budget adjustment. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 55 Kuntz: Sounds good. Bentley: So if nobody has anything else to say, I'll make a motion we approve the parks department to purchase the Ford Ranger truck from the. City Water Department. Bird: Second. Rountree: Moved and seconded that parks department work out an arrangement with the water department for purchase and transfer of the Ranger pick up. Any discussion? Anderson: Question for Tom. Is the sale amount that they want is it this $2566 or do they want more than that? Kuntz: We haven't come to an agreeable amount yet. Bird: I guarantee you it is not going to be $2566. Right Gary? Anderson: Okay so this is one of them open ended deals. I see. Rountree: Any other questions? Smith: Mr. President we only gave him one key to the vehicle. Rountree: I see. Kuntz: And no license plates. Rountree: Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say aye. MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Kuntz: Charlie a couple of other quick announcements. Just a reminder that the tree lighting ceremony is Friday night in front of the post office starts at 6:30 and I'm wondering Councilman Bentley, are you going to report on the soccer complex tonight? Bentley: Yes, I can. Smith: I was surprised that Tom didn't bring up the rest of his adjustment that he wants on the budget because talking with - he had met with Reta and he wanted some budget transfers, which I have copies of. You didn't want to bring that up? That has to be approved to Council when you're adding new amounts. He's just transferring from one ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 56 account to another account. The stuff that you gave Reta. You need to bring that up, otherwise we can't do it. Kuntz: I guess I didn't realize they were budget transfers requiring Council action. What they were is realignment of line items as requested by the Auditing? Smith: Yeah, the auditors want it approved through the Council to make sure it's in the minutes. Rountree: Tom before you go, these were recommended as a result of the audit? Smith: No, he's added the recreation department and he had in wages and he wants to separate it out so you can see how much is being used in that. Kuntz: These are a result of the meeting that we had with Reta and Sue takes care of our accounting, and myself. The auditor had come up with new line items and then we looked at those and came up with some changes that we wanted to make for better tracking and more efficient way of spending out of those line items. So I guess that's why I was a little confused because some of it was coming from the auditor. Smith: It's not the auditor, ifs our new software. Kuntz: Okay. Smith: But the auditor did want it brought up in Council to be approved. Overall it doesn't change the bottom line figure. Bird: It's just changing numbers. Rountree: Changing the line item classification. Bentley: I've got a question Janice. The first item of the $29,300. The account numbers are the same, transferring from and to. Smith: See over to the right. There's one digit difference. Bentley: My mistake. Smith: Any other questions on those? They're pretty general. Bird: This is something we have to do? We need a motion Charlie to change this? Rountree: Yes, we do. r { ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 57 Bird: I move that the City Parks and Recreation Department budget transform be approved as presented to us. Bentley: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we approve the budget transferring form as it's been presented to us by Parks Director Kuntz. Any discussion? All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. D. JANICE SMITH: Smith: Since you're still on that subject, we have one transfer we would like changed also. We're working with Boise on their accounting numbers and working with the blue book, the GAAP, the General Accepted Accounting Practices. We've been going through that a lot with accountants and their new software consultant so I have just one. And I also made a copy of our last financial statement that you got and you probably saw that in there, but I'll let you look at it first because I'm sure you'll have a question. Looking at the blue book and some accounting numbers that we got from Boise, they are separating out their accounting against utilities. I know this accounting would be Reta and Karen. They come out of the enterprise fund and their main function is the enterprise. And we just wanted to separate it leaving the utility wages, taking 670/0 of wages and leaving 330/0 into the accounting wages. You can see it on that expenditure report. How it's copied. It does not change the overall. The overall together is $170,300. So the two added together still adds up to $170,300. Rountree: Any other questions? Bentley: I have none. Bird: I think that's got to be done. Bentley: Mr. President I move we approve the budget transfer form for the MUBS department. Bird: Second. Rountree: It's been moved and seconded that we approve the budget transfer form for the MUBS. All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 58 1. INVESTMENTS Smith: I printed out some history on our investments. A little bit of history on some of our checking accounts that were non active. I think that we need to get that money out of there and get it into something else and comes in line with trying to figure the Councilmen decide on who they are going to have as a consultant for our investments. You guys all remember everything you read in the Buffington Moore McNeil and the other investment book that you got from Floyd Ayers. You know it front to back. (Inaudible) Smith: Did you bring your books? I thought I would go over the investments that we have right now. I put these in categories of funds. I figured it was easier. Sometimes you really don't care what bank you're looking at. You want to see actually how much is in that fund. So the first page, it's all of the investments in the general account. We have four banks there. These are all CD's. Usually when the CD's interest rates are doing good, the state treasurer's department isn't but right now the CD rates and everything are going down so maybe we need to go into state treasury. Right now you have $2,000,000 - almost three million dollars in just the general. On the next page two and three - the next two pages are your enterprise accounts. You have six banks. Rountree: And the grand total is $14.7 million. Smith: Yes, that's correct. So that's the enterprise and then the back page is the building fund, fire truck fund for Kenny wherever he is. Anyway that's what you have. These are kind of -and you see the dates, it says the date, but that's not the beginning date. The due off to the right is as they come due, so as they come due, you can decide what you want done with them. Or if we got an investment advisor they would help us with that. You can't dip into them right now, but you can when they come due. Bentley: What about the ones that says due dates 9/5/98? Smith: I haven't updated it since we've been on the audit. They've been renewed probably at a year. (Inaudible) Interest rates are going down. This is a couple of checking accounts and I am not sure - I know that we put some money in the Idaho Independent Bank. I don't what it is with banks, but they really don't want to get you a good CD rate unless you open up a checking account, but I stuck my ground and did not open a checking account. US Bank we have three accounts. One is reserved for the water and sewer revenue bonds. I didn't put another one on here that's not much money in it on the well fund, and both of these other ones are enterprise accounts, but this is money that can be taken out on both of these accounts. This money is not tied down to a certain amount of time. So this is a start on our firm that we decide to help Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 59 with our investments. In the enterprise account we do have about $10,000,000 in the bank. We need to get that out of there and get some better interest rates. Rountree: Did you say we have $10,000,000 in the checking account in the enterprise fund? Smith: Just enterprise aloF1e. Bird: In a checking account? Rountree: That's above and beyond the $14,000,000 we have tied up in CD's? Bird: It's in a checking account? Smith: They are giving a higher rate to us because - Bird: Well yeah, you got to be kidding me? Smith: That's why we need to get it out of there. Bentley: And that's enterprise? Smith: There's some money in there on the general, but the first three months of our year in the general, you don't have a lot of operating money until January. You'll get a million in on property tax, January and July, so then in January you could invest some more money if the police department doesn't spend it all. Bentley: In the enterprise fund then you've got $24,000,000? Bird: Yes, that's what our audit shows. Smith: The enterprise - one thing about enterprise is they have monthly fees, so - the enterprise is pretty much Self sufficient, but anyway that just kind of gives you a rundown of what's in there. Anderson: Inaudible Smith: No, not since the auditor have been in and haven't been able to get back to them and put the interest earned because there is interest earnings too that I haven't recorded. Anderson: What happens with the money that was budgeted like for example in the fire department's budget, they had money last year for fire truck fund. There should have Meridian City Council December 1 J 1998 Page 60 been at the end of last year a payment that went into this account. Where is that money and all the money that wasn't spent out of everybody's budget in the checking accounts at this point? Smith: Yes, that's in your fund balance forward. (I naud ible) Smith: What we were doing this is define those. Please define those, well fund balance forward and then something happens, reelection comes up and they can't remember where it is, so we're defining them in our new software so that they are with names on who it belongs to. What you the Council decide where you want to go. Bentley: I have a question. I know you have tons of time to look up some of this, but sometime down the road say before we get into the next budget cycle to put things together can you show us where all these surpluses are coming from? Smith: Surpluses like - Bentley: At the end of the year where it's not being spent. Smith: Yeah. Bentley: Which department, what category. Smith: We've already done that - Bentley: I know you've touched on it briefly but I think if we could put it together where we could have it for budget section, we could take a look because if a department is sitting and constantly budgeting "x" number of dollars for this item and they're not using that money, but the next year they bump it up another five or ten percent, we need to reel this in because it's money like the fire department is in need of funds and vehicles and buildings and stuff and the parks department needs more money. But we're showing that we've got all this money spent for the year and at the end of the year we're sitting humming at three quarters to a million dollars that could have been used that year. Smith: Yeah, I would like to give you a quarterly report on that too, not just at the end of the year - Bentley: But I understand where you are at with the auditors and getting everything transferred over. But I'm saying if we can get something going before the budget year comes up so we can have a way to review with the department heads that look you ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 61 keep budgeting the same stuff and it's not used and I don't want to see them get in a use it or lose it mode either. But if they keep bumping something that's really not a necessity then we need to have that money so we can allocate it somewhere else. Gigray: Mr. President) members of the Council, just a point of information on the point of Councilman Bentley. His comment there and I hear the term enterprise funds. There are different issues that pose for sewer and water which are dedicated funs for hook up fees or whatever have to be held for maintenance of the system and you have a little more leeway if you are holding funds to build a station or a fire truck or whatever and I assume those are all separately categorized, but there's some statutory provisions that allow you to do capitol carryovers particularly with fire department things and some other. It would be real good to pay close attention to that. Bird: Janice, are you wanting a motion regarding going to an investment - Smith: Weill know that that - I'm not sure the date it was we requesting a proposal from these two companies, Buffington, Moore McNeil and Seattle Northwest. They're both good companies. Met with both firms, really hard to choose, but I always go to the bottom line. What's it going to cost, so I tagged a couple. Of course they didn't put page numbers on them. So I suggest that maybe you look at what I've looked at is on the last page of Buffington, Moore, McNeil, that's their schedule on fees, and when you look at Seattle Northwest and I can make you copies of these too tonight before I leave Seattle Northwest (End of Tape) Smith: ... agreement. Met with Floyd Ayers, he's on a sabbatical right now. I think he's going to be back in December, because I had some more questions for him. On this fee schedule and agreement, did you have yours with you Keith? Bird: Yes, I do. Smith: Because it says he would negotiate hourly rates and other mutually accepted methods, and I think the water and sewer department might be familiar with Floyd Ayres. He's helped the city with water and sewer revenue bonds. He worked with Nampa on a lot of their projects, but then again the Buffington, Moore, McNeil they worked for banks. They're very reputable. They all know the Idaho laws on government investments, so they're both good. My next suggestion is give it to our auditors, make them - this is what their schedule is, maybe I'll narrow it down to say our investment is $10,000,000. We would' give you $10,000,000. What are your fees instead of just a general oh, 2.32 or .250/0 of all investments, because they want the whole pie. But we can't give them the whole pie right now, because we're dedicated to these banks until as they come due, so I would suggest maybe quick as soon as possible get this to Kevin Anderson at Balukoff and see if he can review these and look ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 62 at these two pages. And he said he would do that. Then get his input, but I posthaste do it. Maybe he can get to us within a week or the next Council meeting to give you - Bird: I don't know about the rest of the guys, but I'm for getting it now. Kevin Anderson was the one that sat right here and told us to get a investment banker. Smith: Yes, he did. Bird: We've dinked around on this for six months. How much money have we lost in six months. 6.16 is the biggest interest you're getting on any of your CD's, absolutely. Most of them are 5. They're going to go down. You're not going to roll them over for that. I'm ready to make a motion. I'm ready to vote on it, get the thing down the road. Smith: They're both very good companies. I have felt safe working with both of them. Either one, that is alii have. Rountree: I know I have talked to Bob a little bit about you possibly getting a hold of Ken Harward. Smith: Yeah, I did. He was the one that recommended Floyd Ayres, because he worked with him in Nampa. Bird: He wrote their bonds for their recreation center and all that stuff is what - he got their bonds, set up their bonding because he had him come over and talk to us on bonding. Smith: Well it sounded like talking to Floyd Ayres, there was a fee up front and set in amount no matter how long you use him. But when you look at his fee schedule and agreement he's negotiable on different things. Bird: The other one is a flat fee. Smith: The other one is percentage off any investment. Bird: If you make money, they take it off from - Smith: Overall the investments interest earnings are going to pay for either one of them. Bird: That's right. Smith: I mean don't nickel and dime. Let's get it done. (~- Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 63 Bird: I agree. Smith: Any other questions? Rountree: Thank you Janice. Bird: Do you want a motion or do you want a discussion first? Rountree: We can have a motion and a discussion on the motion. If you're ready to make a motion. Bird: Mr. President, I move that Meridian City Council enters into an investment agreement with Buffington, Moore and McNeil for a period of one year with review at the end of one year as we have with the attorneys. The amount to be invested is to be determined by the Mayor, City Council, and Treasurer. Anderson: I'll second it so we can have a discussion. Rountree: Discussion. Anderson: Why would we not want to take Janice's advice and get a recommendation from this Kevin Anderson? Why are you set on the Buffington Moore? Bird: Weill think that they presented it. Kevin sat here and told us when he went over the audit with us we need to get on it. We've waited six months. Well it will be another six months. Right now you are getting into the accountant's busiest time of the year. Accounting firms are getting ready for their tax season the auditors. I don't know how soon he could have it back. Could he have it back for the 15th? This was suppose to be on the agenda for the last two months and then we finally got it on. That's the only thing I am going by. Anderson: Janice indicated that he could look at it and have a recommendation to us by the 15th, didn't you? (Inaudible) Bentley: That was my concern too is walking into something and not having a straight up view as to what the cost was going to be. Rountree: Any other discussion? All right, I'll throw out my two cents worth. I think we need to move forward. I agree that we've sat on it too many years, not just months, too many years. We've probably lost a fair amount of money. Whether or not that means that we make an immediate rash decision. I don't see that Keith's motion put us in a ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 64 situation that we'd do anything more than enter into an agreement and if we can't come to an agreement in that process, then we might have to find somebody else, but I guess if I were going to vote on this issues, that's how I would view the motion and probably would be supportive of it. Mr. Gigray do you have any advice based on your experience in municipalities and these kinds of things? In thirty seconds or less. Gigray: Mr. President, I've only had experience with Mr. Ayres in an $18,000,000 bond for the Caldwell Schoof District their new high school and he also did the - when they built Sacajawea and he's also provided technical assistance to the Canyon Highway District and I've always found him to be an excellent person to work with and has always given very good advice. I think the other firm has a good reputation as well. Rountree: That's what I gathered from the discussions I've had in the industry. Gigray: I think this is a very good idea. Rountree: Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. Rountree: The assumption there I think is Janice and the Mayor take the administrative action and get something together for the Council. Bird: I think Janice ought to get a hold of them and get them over here to talk with her. Rountree: And we'll probably need our auditor involved as well because we're going to need to have another action that will establish what funds and the amounts of those funds we're going to invest and how much we're going to need to operate the city and what constraints we mayor may not have on some of the enterprise funds. E. CHARLIE ROUNTREE 1. INSURANCE DISCUSSION Rountree: The next item on the agenda is the discussion on the insurance coverage for the health insurance for the City of Meridian. We've had some information provided by both the Mayor and our insurance broker on this particular issue. We have a recommendation from the city's insurance committee to change insurance coverage from Blue Cross to Blue Shield. In that the resulting savings is being recommended to be forward in terms of paying for workman's compensation and what was the other one? Bentley: Long term disability. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 65 Rountree: Long term disability and life insurance coverage for city employees. Increasing the life insurance amount. Any comments, discussions on where we go with that? Anderson: Mr. President, in light of the presentation that we had from Ron Tares, I think we go with the recommendation of the insurance committee. I think in all fairness a good faith effort was put out to both the insurance providers and Blue Shield offered the best policy for the money and that's what we had asked them for was a quote and I would recommend that we go with Blue Shield. Rountree: Any discussion? Is that a motion? Anderson: I would put that in the form of a motion. Bentley: Second. Rountree: A motion and a second to accept the recommendation of the City's insurance committee to change insurance carriers from Blue Cross to Blue Shield for medical insurance and to include long term disability, was that the intent, and additional life insurance amounts for city employees was motion and seconded. Discussion? Bird: I've got a question and this is on something else. I want to know why the city has only one insurance agent bidding on this. We seem to want to have two or three on everything else, but we select one agent, insurance agent. There's other very capable agents out there that does it. I don't like the way the whole thing went down from either Blue Cross or Blue Shield's way. I think it was a very phony set up. That's my personal opinion. I don't think either one of them and I don't know what went down with the agent. I mean we got the agent's story tonight. I have happened to also get the other side's story too, so I'm so mixed up. I don't know whether I'm punched or bored, but insurance is the biggest fallacy going which if anything should be regulated, I think that's one area that certainly should look to doing, but I have a real hard feeling about changing for the simple fact is Blue Cross come back and I don't like this aspect either. I don't like Blue Shield getting Blue Cross's rates which was given to them to bid it. Being making a living in the bidding field and at the same token, I don't like Blue Cross being able to come back and say 1'(1 meet or match. The same token Blue Cross is a community tax paying entity. Blue Shield is not. I would say after this I want more than one agent giving bids on stuff. We require more than one for everything else. There's other good agents out there that handle Blue Cross, Blue Shield, everything else, and they can play with their commissions, give us different deals. That's alii got to say. Rountree: Any other discussion? I guess to that point Mr. Bird that that's probably subject to an ordinance on the part of the city or some kind of a resolution on the part of the Council at a future date. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 66 Bird: We'll get that. Rountree: No more discussion? Bentley: I'll kick in my two cents. I agree in part with Keith. I'm not real excited about the way this thing went down. I think it could have been handled better by everybody involved, but hopefully we can clean that up as we have several other problems we've stumbled onto. Rountree: I'll get the final sayan this and I tend to agree that I think that the confusion in being played one against the other is not the situation that I think we need to be in and I think in the future that if we do retain an agent and the agent does all of that and we don't need to know what goes on. Anyway I'm a little bit disappointed in some of the things I heard on both sides, and you guys have a motion before you. As soon as you get that one and the next one done, we can probably go home. All those in favor of the motion. MOTION CARRIED: 2 ayes. 1 nay. Rountree: I still have the floor in terms of the agenda. Would you all be open to a planning session next week as opposed to trying to get something going on the week after Christmas? Bird: Boy, I would be. Bentley: Yeah. Anderson: I'm going to be gone the week between Christmas and New Years. Rountree: So we're talking the 8th or - how about the 9th? Can we get City Hall the 9th? Bird: Wednesday. Rountree: Is that a problem with anybody? Bird: The 9th? Bentley: Not at this time. Anderson: I think we're taking proposals on the fire station. Bird: On the 9th? ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 67 Anderson: On the 9th I think is one of the - Bird: I thought it was the 10th, on the Thursday. Rountree: Are you going to be reviewing them that evening? Anderson: Yeah, I think. I have to check the schedule. I have it written down some where. Bird: I thought it was the 10th. I might be wrong. What's wrong with the 8th? Rountree: P & Z will be in here. Bird: That's right. Gigray: How much room do you need? Rountree: Well you never know how many people can show up. I mean usually nobody, sure enough if you had it in the coffee room, you'd have ten people show up. Gigray: Can you have it in the other building? Rountree: You mean in the Mayor's - Gigray: No, ir.1 the building that we're in on Carlton. Bird: We'd have to - Rountree: Well in terms of recording and all that kind of stuff, it makes it a little difficult. How about the 7th? Mondays are bad? Bentley: Monday is not going to be good for me. Rountree: Well let's plan on the 9th unless it falls through and Ron you can let us know. Bird: Really Ron, are you interviewing on the 9th or are you just accepting their proposals? Anderson: I can't remember which is it. (Inaudible) Bird: Yeah, that's when the proposals come in. / ! Meridian City Council December 1 J 1998 Page 68 Rountree: So you'd be looking at them later. I don't have much on the agenda, but there's some things we need to talk about and one that's been hanging around a long time whether or not we can get it on and that's the cross connection demonstration from the people in the City of Boise. We need to get that going before we get into irrigation system. So Gary if you could get that scheduled for the 9th, the video and the individual to come and talk to us about what - it's United Water that does that; is that correct? If we could make that happen on the 9th that would be great. I had some indication that the new school superintendent would like to be introduced to us, so if you could make that arrangements, Will, we could meet the new school superintendent. The other thing is that Bill has talked about to discuss procedure and operations of meetings and some of our motions and whatnot and he's got a handout for us tonight anyway. That's all I'm proposing we talk about. Get in and get out hopefully by 8:30 9:00 unless there's something that's really burning a whole in your desires that you want to talk about. I've got another one here the Ten Mile Station, but I think we can probably talk about that at some point in time in the future. Bentley: I don't have anything that pertains to this. I just wanted to give a report on the soccer complex at the national level. The corporate decided that the Treasure Valley wasn't big enough for them to get involved with. Tom, you spoke with the realtor on the property. Kuntz: He called me long distance from Oregon on Friday and I just gave the information that you just shared with the Council. He said he would like to wait until he got back into town to sit down with me to see if there are some other options available because the couple who are selling the land really would rather it went towards parks and he's got two developers who are interested in the property but the land owners are real interested in it becoming a park. Not necessarily a soccer complex, but a park so he and I are going to sit down and I may bring some information back to the Council at a later date. Bentley: I would really like to the Council to give some thought on maybe just acquiring the land for a park site or whatever we desire at a later date. At 12 5 it's awful cheap. We paid 20 for the 56 acre site. And something later maybe come along to where we can partner up with somebody else to put the plan back on schedule, but you know it's a thought of buying some land before it all gets away. And I realize the concern is let's get the 56 acre going, but I think the city is big enough to plan for more than one project at a time. So I would just like everybody to think about that and hopefully we can work something out when Tom gets a chance to speak with the realtor and the landowners again. And I want to thank Tom too for his help in trying to put this together and he worked really hard at it. We gave it a pretty good shot I thought, and I think that Gary Babbitt did too with the time he spent with it and the architect and stuff. Maybe we can revive it different time different place, but anyway thanks. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 69 Anderson: Question for Tom on that subject. I strongly agree that Meridian needs more park space, but I guess before would endorse going out and looking at a piece of land just because it's a good buy I would like to see a master plan put together for the parks department that identifies key areas of the city on where we want to put park space and what type of parks we want whether they're sports parks or picnic parks or what kinds of parks they are. I think right now we don't have a good plan and maybe this piece of land might fit into that land. Maybe it's a good buy, but I really don't know because I haven't seen any kind of master plan and I know we just finished Tully Park and this seems like it's right out in the same area and just down the road a little bit further and what are we doing to balance out our park system throughout the city so I guess kind of in answer to Glenn's question too is instead of giving thought about buying this one piece of property, I would like look at the overall picture and then decide whether this one fits into that plan. Kuntz: I agree with you Councilman Anderson. As you recall you approved $25,000 to do a park comprehensive plan that would go hand in hand with the updated city comprehensive plan that's going to be done. And I'm currently working on the RFP's for that so we can get moving on that, but I agree. We need to have a blueprint and a plan in place for not only identifying property, but how we are going to pay for that property. I think that's the thing that's lacking right is I've identified five different sites over the last six months, but without some kind of a purchase plan, funding plan, in place. Anderson: Yeah, it doesn't do any good to identify them. Bird: Another thing my statement is purchasing is fine, but let's develop what we've got. Kuntz: I think there needs to be a balance and I think that will come out in the comprehensive plan is that the way that land is being eaten up by developers that by having a plan in place, identifying the park sites and then having a balance of money put towards developing and acquisition. Then I think it's going to be a win/win situation for the community. Bird: I think the comprehensive plan will really help. Kuntz: And we know Optimist wants to develop a site here in Meridian to accommodate those teams and so we're hoping to work with Optimist in the coming years to develop a site here in Meridian. Bird: I wouldn't bet on that. I think we've done about all we got. Rountree: Any other issues? ( ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 70 Bentley: Just one. We are doing one more order of pies goes in the 3rd, so if anybody is interested, there's a sheet in the break room. Rountree: Before you go we have an ACHD meeting potential on the 17th. Do you want to - my question is are the new commissioners going to be there or are we just going to be meeting with a lame duck group? Bird: I thought we were going to wait until the new commissioners come in. (Inaudible) Bentley: Well my feeling would be I just assume wait until the new commissioners get In. Rountree: Yeah, if they aren't going to be there, I don't want to meet. Bird: I'm with you Charlie. I don't - Rountree: There's no sense in meeting with Gary and - (Inaudible) Rountree: So do you want to take them up on that offer, or tell them we'd like to sit down with them in January? Bird: It's pretty close to Christmas season. Rountree: Just tell them we want to defer until after the first of the year. Bird: February. Rountree: We don't have any issues at this point now. Bentley: When are they going to get Franklin done? Anderson: When are they going to make a decision on the one way couplets or widening Meridian Street? Bird: That's another thing that's been postponed for two years. Anderson: I am ready to make a decision. ( Meridian City Council December 1, 1998 Page 71 Bird: I am too. We can't get on the stupid agenda. Rountree: Well let's get it on the agenda. Bentley: I was going to say you might check with the Mayor when he gets back. Because that committee was suppose to be reporting to us - Rountree: That committee was suppose to have been a month ago. Quite frankly I can tell you what the committee is going to tell you and I don't know that it's in general agreement with what I'm hearing on the end of the Council. Bird: It's the same old committee that we're going to get the same old report. It's the same people on it. I can tell you who dominated the committee. Rountree: But anyway yeah we asked him to do that and we need to get it on the agenda. Bentley: Would you do that? Rountree: I will continue to try, yes. Bentley: Motion to adjourn. Bird: Second. Rountree: All those in favor? MOTION CARRIED: All ayes. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11 :25 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1,1998 -7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ROLL CALL: K RON ANDERSON X CHARLIE ROUNTREE X GLENN BENTLEY )( KEITH BIRD o MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE CONSENT AGENDA - /i-f,r/)v.e., A. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 17,1998: B. RESOLUTION #205 - USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT (APPROVED 11/17/98) C. APPROVE BILLS: REGULAR AGENDA 1. TABLED FROM NOVEMBER 17TH, 1998: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.8 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT- PORTION OF NW % SEC. 3, T.3N., R.1W: ~rov.l!/ 2. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A RETAIL CARPET STORE BY CLAY HARTZ d/b/a FASHION FLOORS AND INTERIORS - 126 KING STREET: ~v./l fl;: I c/t sf ()ld.Jvr- "I- cUci'j/Thv 3. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR WHITESTONE ESTATES NO.3 BY WHITESTONE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC - SOUTH OF FRANKLIN RD & WEST OF LINDER RD: ~v.e.... flF i elt. {tltU1-o/- c&ci~i\nv 4. FINAL PLAT FOR THOUSAND SPRINGS NO.1 SUBDIVISION BY FARWEST L.L.C. - NORTH OF VICTORY AND WEST OF EAGLE ROAD: a?Ph9v.e wl}-'1L ~n~ 5. FINAL PLAT FOR STETSON ESTATES BY JIM JEWETT - TEN MILE AND VICTORY ROAD: CZfP r--o v~ 6. FINAL PLAT FOR THE LANDING NO. 11 BY MALLARD LANDING LLC - SW % -l \t - .fA- SECTION 13 T. 3N., R. 1 W: #bee ~ ~ 15 ~ ~ 7. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY PACIFIC NORTHWEST ELECTRIC -- NW % SECTION 5, T3N. R1E: ~~~ 1-0 fJ1Lf~ I/?ic/L ( ( 8. DISCUSSION OF RC WILLEY TILING OF DITCH: bond H r- i7 7, ^..:J 9. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF MERIDIAN CITY WATER SERVICE OUTSIDE CITY LIMITS ON TEN MILE ROAD BY LARRY E. HANSEN: a-ff'rov~ 10. WATER I SEWER I TRASH DELINQUENCIES: d/ffJTOV.JZ- 11. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. GARY SMITH: 1. LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT FOR SEWER LINE CROSSING ON VAN AUKER SEWER PRO~ECT. _ --ttLpf.e, ~l /Jec /511:- At) B. CHIEF BOWERS: 1. BUDGET CHANGES ~pr7JV~ C. SHARI STILES: 1. STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR COMP PLAN UPDATE r-ec~.et\recL f~ 2. REQUEST BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT TO PLACE A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IN DAKOTA RIDGE SUB. (LOT 8, BLOCK 1) D. TOM KUNTZ: 1. BUDGET LINE ITEM ADJUSTMENT I VEHICLE r>URCHASE apjJrl7v.e- A. LYK..- Ii:o~ Ir~~ber E. JANICE SJylITH: Ii. L &l)d~\ \(Q0-S-kV nIU\~ AQ('+L,?s' ;) ~h INVESTMENTS F. CHARLIE ROUNTREE 1. INSURANCE DISCUSSION ( - CITY 0 F MERIDIANr. PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET tilt; ~cJ, ~hntlj ---- . 0 RECEIVED DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF lVIERIDIAN PHONE NlTMBER 'ifrr .- d u;) 8' go 7~ -O~S I n/j'-o~~0 ~2, :3 ~;l8 J> 8$~~ b/( ~ <?'-?~5? (.... CITY 0 F MERID IAN, PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET _el ht f!(J-tvn u:t .Ihu~ RECEIVEr DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDW NA'ME ~ ",./ /" \--~.- ~ ? .. u ~, .1 --/UrV #~ ~ttyn1;;/h~ (~- - MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 1, 1998 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER:~8 REQUEST: DISCUSSION OF RC WILLEY TILING OF DITCH AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: 0'20 l~ '" "\. J pi(rv ) 111'~ j S}3" t ~ L eJ~ ~ ((/i~ MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: APPLICANT: REQUEST: WATERlSEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: 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: t-9:r~ER: ~ Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. DECEMBER 1, 1998 ITEM NUMBER: 10 #~U QO ~ 0'\ o ............. N ~ ~~ 00 ~~ ~~ U~ Z~ ~,..., ~~ O~ ~= ~~ ~~ ~~ o ~ ~ ~ .oS ~ .~ ~ ~ I U ~ ~ ~ c.~.8 ~ ~ .~ ~ C ~ ~U~~~ o~.o~a ..p..l ~ (1).~ s .a~~t::&j~ .~ &j S 0 ~ 00 ~C:5~~a .s ~.~ @.s ~ ~~oo~~ ~ (1) (1) U · 0 ..t:l .s ..s .S ~ Z ~ ~~~ o (1) ~ ~ d C"'-. >. c: ~ ~ o~ G f'\~ (1) ~~ = .82~~~~ Q) 00 ~ s .a: cr ooO\C~Q)d oO\C\io~~ ..8~s~~~ o f'\() rn~ ~ ~ ~ ..~..t:l ouC-H~~rn ~(1)(j,)o=e ~Q.s&~~ '-" ~ ~ s ;;.] O()~ o~ OJ C'd .S 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ...p..l~~ ~ ~ rn ~ ~ ~ ~.~ OJ ~ ~ ~ ~ <1.) ~ .,...,,......( $:;;( r.n. . ~ ~ · ~:B ~ ~f'\ g~.o..t:l~~ >.0 .8 ~ 0\ ~ ~("'f')=~~ t= t'- 0 ~ Q\r\.= c.S~~~Q] d <1.) Q) ~ · ;::c OJ) ~ ~ ,....." ......... o ~ d Q) I--t en ..p..l .~ .~ ~ ,-( 2 trJca~oo~= .~ (1) ~ 00 0 r:n ~ <1) ~r\ ~ U :.a=~ooo ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ......... .~ ::> S r:rJ. .. ~ 0 ~ .......... (1) ~d~~=..t:l o .S;;::l ~ 23 o~ ~ l:: 0 ~.~ ~ ~~S"t::~o t) 0 ~v O..)..t:l ~U.s.o~ ca~ (l) cA .~ ~ U~ (1) (l) ~.s ~~ ~ ~ o 0 .~ ~ r.n~ .~ U = (1) 0,) .-0 > (1)~ ~ o~ ~ 0 ~u ~ 0 r.n o ~._ ca~1n OJ ~ .~ ~o~ ~.........~ ~ ~ 0 ~as SF35E ~~o (1) ~..t:l ~ f'\~ t: ~ ~ 0 ~O~ ~ U ~ ~.......o Q) u ~ ~ oS a c.S .~ (1) dQ..t:l .~ ~ ~ca S.u ~ Q).~ 0 ~~ o :::s ~ ..=~~ o~..t:l ~ ~ ~ ~o.o Q) ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ .. .0 ~ ~~~ o (l) > ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .= > (1) ~~ (- o ~?J ~ o u ~:i5 ~ s ~ --~ r.., o ~ o cae 0\ ............. 0\ <= ............. f'l ~ ~~ 00 ~~ >~ u~ z~ ~~ ~~ o~ ~~ ~~ ~~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ .€j ~ I U 0 ~ ~ c.~ .~ ~ ~ .~,.d c ~ dU~~~ o en ~ O,.d~ en 0 ~ +-' (1).,..... ~ .E~~~~ .~ C\j S (1) ~ ~~S;;:::~= ~ ~.~ ~,:Ej ~. ~~dS;;~ >o..>~Q O~ ~ Q.) 0 0 caO,.d~~Z ,.d ~ ~ .,..... ~ ~ ~ cO ~ o Q)"8...... C'-. ~ ~ Q) ~ .S G d'~~ ~"C = ~~~ Q.) Q,) Q) 00 "0 S .e; & ~ ~ a 5 8.s ..8~r:n~~o U r. -0 r.n "C ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ,.d OO~~+-lClj ~Q)Q)Q)~~ ~a~~~~ · ~ .....". ~ "C oi)~5] ~~ .S ~ "0 ~ A ~ .E g ~ d ~ (t) ~ ~ "0 .~ Q) ~ .S ~ .~] @ :~ 5o..;~,.d~~ ~o.8 ~O\ ~<;! =~~ ~ t:: t'-- 0 "C 0\". ~ tSd~~O] d Q) C1)~ · ;::c OJ) ~ ;... ,.--.., ~ OSdO~U"J . ~ .~.~ ~ f'""1 B Ul C\3 '-i Q) o+-t ~ .~ Q.) ~ 00 0 lZJ ~ <U ~n "C 0 ~~~Q.)QJo ~ 0 ~~~-+-J .~ ~ S Cf) · · dO?+-l (1) O~=:::~S~ .S .u 0 0 .~ > t:: $:f" ~.~ ~ ~ Cl) =s ~- "C 0 t> 0 ro--~ ~ '1:j u ~ ~-- ~ ~i- .~ ~ U~ 0,) (].) ,.d~ ~ ~ ~,.d o 0.0 ~ ~ o 0 · ~ ...d .~ ~ o ~ 0,) Q) ~ >- tUJ:.:U ~ <u,.g ~ 0 ,.dU ;..... 0 rfJ ~ ~.- ~ "C tn Q.) )-0-1 · ~ ~o~ ~~~ C\J ~ 0 ~~s S~.E ~ ;;>.='O,) ] ~~ ~ "~ ~ ~ 0 ,.dO~ ~ U ::s "O~o OJ u ~ E'j; a cEcS] .~ ~ ~ca $.u ~ Q).~ 0 ~""'O ~~"S (l)..d,.d~ 1:: ~ ~~~ Q,)O,......j ,.d~:-= ~ ~ ~ .. ...c ;..... ~"C~ o Q) ~ > ~ ~ < .~ .~ ~ ;;> (1) ~~~ I- a:: o a... w 0:: >- (J z W ::J o z ::i w o W l- e:( Q o I- 0:: lfi >- U. LL 0 D) ~ en tI) T"'"' co I'- -.... co (J) t- =>> co 0::: en 5 C'\I co 0) :t: ...J ('t) ('t) co UJ <( ..J 0 (") ('I) ...J 0 0 Lt) (J) ..q- ~ <t UJ C ~ ii: .... =It C'\I t- ~ co Lt) -J N 0 t- O> (3 V t'""- Lt) ~ z D) UJ T"'"' <0 0) I'- ~ (7) 0::: T"'"' ('t) ..q- 0> 0 -.... ........ v v Lt) co :3 ('t) co C\I C\I 0 en LO <0 ('I) Lt) 0 ...J ...J 'or- .... <C 0 .... 0 c tJ) z u: =I:t: en C\I v W T"'"' t'""- co ~ to ('i) V U- ti) C'\I ~ N 0 I'- 0) I'- t- I'- ('t) LO ....... ....... LL ....... ~ (J) C'":! ~ 0) LO ('t) co ~ ('t) 1.() ~ 0 It: ('I) co co T"'"' T"'"' LO 0 0) ('I) t- o T"'"' T"'"' en :5 (J) (i) T"'"' T"'"' T"'"' t- t- O> t- <0 (J) V 0> I- D) t- O> ........ t- co 0> M V V t- ('I) It) en ........ =>> co ...J 0 ..q- T"'"' co t- en t- v f"- co co t- LO :t: en 0 T"'"' T"'"' T"'"' 0 en ...J c T"'"' ..J < <( 0 0 t- Lt) 0 0 ('I") ('i) C'\I ('t) LO ........ eo ~ tJ) co 0> 0 0> CD co <Xl Lt) 0 t"- o t- l- ii: =I:t: T"'"' T"'"' T"'"' ~ -I tn T"'"' <0 co V 0 a v v N co f"- ('t) ('I) (3 0 ~ T"'"' LO 0> C'\I ~ ('t) T"'"' LO C'! 0 co 0:: Lt) C\I a) co t- co (J) t- l.() m co 1.0 ('t) Z co :3 C\I co C\I 0) t- O> C\I 0 co 0 0 <0 t'""- ~ en ('i) t'""- O> LO C\I co L() f'.. 0> m v v t'""- O ........ ...J 0> co 00 LO T"'"' (J) V 0 0 v v 0> co ....... 0 T"'"' Lt) V ('t) ('t) C'\I ('i) C\I ('i) N ('i) ('I) 0 (.) Q') v 0 ..J 0 .... < I- 0 v co T"'"' en T"'"' C\I ('I) C") (i) 0 N ('I) en v ('i) v 00 <0 V co t- O> l"'- N ........ z LL =I:t: T"'"' ('t) l.O ("') ('I) (i) ('I) C\l ('t) N V ('I) ~ u.. ('i) It) 0 C\I ........ t- co co 0 0 l.O ('i) co u. 0) C'! 0 co C\! 0> co T"'"' 0 co LO en ('t) 0 en 0> l.O V co T"'"' t- o ..0 U') C\I ('I) t- o t-. 0::: ('i) T"'"' T"'"' T"'"' T"'"' C\I V 0;) co co It) C\I ex) .... en :3 ('I') co 0 T"'"' l"- t- or- 1.0 T"'"' C\I 1.0 V co ~ ........ co ........ 0> 0 ,...... <0 co t- It) co T"'"' ex> v ::r: CD ...J T"'"' T"'"' T"'"' 0 cn T"'"' U'J ...J 0 ..J c( C < (.) co t.O t- V t'""- V ('I') co (X) ........ 0 T"'"' ~ en ('I) co co T"'"' co t- O) co LO co co t- .... LL =It T"'"' T"'"' ~ ...J ....... co ........ .,... v co ('I) co <0 ('t) V ex) ('I) (3 C\I T"'"' C\! C\I ....... 1.0 ~ L() 1.0 V 0 ~ 0) ....... t/J <0 l"'- N ('i') 0) N V ('i') C\I 0 0 0 C\I Z en 0::: T"'"' T"'"' V T"'"' ('I) T"'"' ('I) Lt) co co v Lt) co ~ ........ :3 v L.O V It) ....... or- N t- co 0) t- CD C\I 0 CD 0 co 0 V t- V t- T"'"' N C'\I L() co ('I") en ...J C\I C\I V T"'"' C\I ('I) ('i) C\l ('i) ('I) ('I) ('i) 0 ..J 0 ('I) 0 < C .... 0 I- !!Z ('I) l.O V V CD ....... V T"'"' co 0 T- N ....... C\I <0 It) 0 ....... C\I co 0 l.O 0 V Z u.. =It T"'"' C\I ('t) C\I ('I) ('t) v C\I ('t) ('i) ('I) ('i) ~ L... '- L... ::E: (]) (]) ~ Q) .... '- ..c .c ~ ..c Z Q) E E CO -+-I E ..c m :J .c U) Q) 0 0 (]) Q) :J L... <..> ~ Q) >, ~ a. > 0 ..c '- .~ :E t> c m c 0 Q) CO Q) ::J ::J ~ Q) 0 Z 0 -, u.. ;2 ~ :2 J ...., (jJ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 1,1998 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 11-A1 REQUEST: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: GARY SMITH -LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT FOR SEWER LINE CROSSING ON VAN AUKER SEWER PROJECT AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: ~. t(Y ~jvfr CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 11 1998 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 11-81 REQUEST: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: CHIEF BOWERS - BUDGET CHANGES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: 9~.~TRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NArv).pA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SET~LERS IRR.IGATION: IDAHO POWER: ~~ US W;J;ST: IN~M9UNTAIN GAS: ,-j3lJR~U 'OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. / \. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 1.1998 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 11-C1 REQUEST: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: SHARI STILES - STATEMENTS OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR COMP PLAN UPDATE COMMENTS AGENCY CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: (1ktJ./ 1 ~, C~~ lil fivJ rQ;v ~Vv~ ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. (- MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 1,1998 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 11-C2 REQ U EST: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: SHARI STILES - REQUEST BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT TO PLACE A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER IN DAKOTA RIDGE SUB (LOT 8. BLOCK 1) AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: .lIsk I} (J O~.1 · t -~ "n ,fJ t!\ r W/VtY PO )nP 1\ I ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. ( \ ." .. 6D ( , STEINER DEVELOPMENT, l.l.C. . 24 November 1998 via fax: 887-1297 City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Meridian 10 83642 Attn: Sheryl Sable .. RE: Constructipn trailer . Dear Sheryl: I - .. '-'.c.. _\'~y ~} RECEIVED N,(YV 2 4 1998 . CITY OF MERIDIAN A. We respectfully request your pell11ission to have our construction trailer placed in the Dakota Ridge Subdivision. block 1. lot 8. The trailer is used to oversee the construction progress in ' said subdivision. I If you have any questions or require further information, please fee' free to contact me. 'Thank you. Sincerely, ~~ /l .~/ . f (tit. t tVRAt. oug ~Jpbe~ ~ ~ f . , '" ..... .\ . .;, I' \ 3875 W.~ Ustick. Meridian ID .83642 (208) 884-2076 fax (208) 884-2086 ~ , . NOU 24 '98 10:40 , " PAGE. 02 ( j (, MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 1,1998 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 11-01 REO U EST: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: TOM KUNTZ - BUDGET LINE ITEM ADJUSTMENT I VEHICLE PURCHASE AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: US WEST: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. - - . . ~........ -.. ~..... -" . +.. .-, Cr; r: ~ '2:. RECE-L V1~.;r DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIM ... ~(j - - - - ~ - -- - -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ L ~~~ __ . _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ -_~ -- _ ~ _ - ~ .- ~. ,... .,..,: - :-.....-. ~-: -_ 7 -._- - ---:"-7. _.J...-......:....-.-=-..._ -~ __ _ ___ ____ _ -_...L_ -== ____. _ - --~~~- ~- ~~ --_._~~~--. -- - - -- - - - - -- - - .-- - . - - - - - _ ~ . :. _ _ ~ _ _ _ - ~_- -_c.....:_ _ _ _ _ -. __7_ ~ _ _ __ . - :- ~;c.__ c.. ._ . . M EM 0 RANDIJM;u : -~~c,c-:.~:~";_:':';;;;O';-~~C0C c; ;:~.e~'C:.o.cc.:~~ .:.. ..". tj" (~ - I: . FROM: City Councilman and Mayor Corrie ,---c-I(~ Tom Kuntz 1- I TO: DA TE: 11-30-98 RE: Funds from auctioned Park's vehicles Three antique Parks trucks were sold at the Musick & Sons Auction on November 14th~ Revenue received from the three vehicles totaled $2~566 . which is normally receipted into the general fund~ Instead I would like to reqllest authorization to use this revenue to offset the purchase of a used 1994 Ford Ranger from the City Water Department~ If this request is approved the budget expenditure line item that could be amended is 01- 5200-94100 - capital vehicles or 01-5200-53106 vehicle maintenance~ From The Desk Of............. Tom Kuntz 11 W Bower Meridian, 10 83642 (208) 888-3579 ~~~ ~~ -- u~ I ~~~ ~Cl z ~ C - ~ w :!: u. o >- J- - U ~~ E~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pl'~ w 2j w~ C> z <( .... .... z :c ~S u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 q q q q ~ q ~ q q 0 ~ 0 q .... 0 0 N ~ 0 t- O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0> -q- -q- ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :E M 0 L() C'f) N N CO 1.0 CD L{) 0 CD 0 <( Q) L(') L() M -q- t- O -q- CD N N ~ N -q- "'[- ~ - t5 (j) JB 0 <:( a:: ~ 0 ill CD () "0 ~ I- a> J- a:: LL 0... 0 en "'0 Z ~ W 0 0 "'[- N L(') L(') CD 0 0 -q- N 0 f""- U. 0 0 N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U) N N 0 0 0 0 0 0> -q- ~ -q- "'[- "'[- U ~ ~ N N N N N Q) -q- I.{) ~ -q- ~ Z ~ "d: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L(') ~ ~ L{) U ~ <( 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a a 0 0 N N N N N N N a 0 0 0 0 0 I- "'t"- "'[- "'[- or- ~ or- "'[- N N N N N N 1.{) L{) l.O l() L(') LD I.{) LD l.O 1.O l{) 1.0 I.{) I I I I I I I I I I I I I "'['- or- "'[- ~ -.:- "'[- "'[- ~ "'[- or- or- T""" T""" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ q 0 ~ q q 0 q q q q ~ q :!: I- 0 0 N ..q- 0 f""- a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0') "l::t -q- 0r- a a a a a 0 0 ~ :!: ~ 0 1.0 ('Y') N N co lO co lO a co 0 <( CJ) l{) 1.0 ('Y') I "l::t I I f""- a ..q- (0 N 0 N or- I I I N ..q- -r- -q- I I I I I I I U. ~ :E 0 I w =I:t: a:: U. .... u. z a:: 0 a or- N L(') L() CD 0 0 ..q- N 0 0 UJ ::l 0 a N N N N N 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 W N "'[- 0 a 0 0 0 ~ 0 "'[- -q- 0 or- Z u. ~ "'[- N N N N N "'[- "'d" l.O "'d" ('i) ('f) () en ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L{) LO L{) 0'> ~ L() <( U Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <( <( 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 ~ N ~ N N N N N N N N "'[- N N a::: It) L() l.O It) L{) L() U? L{) L{) L{) 1.{) l.{) l{') l- I-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'T""" 'T""" 'T""" 'T""" ~ 'T""" 'T""" ~ 'T""" 'T""" "'[- T""" 'T""" I- C/) ~ W I... co C) en a.. -U) -0) Q.) E C u C C> C co 0 C (l) co ::J ~ J:: Q.) E c Q) -C/) C. E Q.) .8 1; al cn Q) .Q. > ~ C> Q) 0 - (/) co I... 0 :J I... ro co 0" U) a. C ~ a.. ~ c LU ..::.::: E Q) en ,Q I I... - E c 16 ~ co ..::.::: E .~ 0 0 -Q) a.. I... Q.) ;g J:: ~ Q.) (/) a. E co > I... C 0... 0 :J Z C Q) () Q) ro g I... ~ 0 s- a> a. p ~ a. ::J () cr: E i= 0 Q) X :J E () p:: I... ill .8 c r - <C u J2 0 ~ 0 Z <:( Q) ~ I... J= .8 C/) u C .9 co <( c ~ E Q) Q) 0... -0) ...J 0 -en 9 E I... I U Q) () c $ a.. ~ Q) c Q) c ,9- a> X en Q.) E 0::: '0. co w Q) co ..c :J E c I... 0 0- .8 co Q) u ~ .Q. <l) ~ J:: w :J P 1; 0:: en -0} -L.., 0- eo E Q) E 0 E .8 x (j) .0 W ~ I 0 0 0 I J:: J9 c 1- co "'0 I... -en ........ en Q) I.+- .....J C I.+- Q) C Q) Q) a> a. 0) 1:5 ~ Q) g Q) C) C) Q) x C> 0 en E co c >. ill c co "- c .c =: co 0 co "- 0> co Q) .Q- .r= 0. u ..c C >.. .r= > :J ~~ U .~ () 0 co U I 0- m c E ~ C P ~ c ~ kU Q) Q) :J Q.) a. ::J (]) Q) :J a. c.. > 0 > ~ 0 > > 0 co :J 0 () 0 Q5 () 0 0 0 ~ Q) E () E () E E t) co en co co en co W 0'> I I- u <( Q.) c 0 z <( - c - ~ w ~ LL o >- J- - U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w .... (!) z w <{ z ::z: u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ q ~ 0 ~ ~ C? ~ ~ .... 0 0 N ..q- 0 f'-.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0'> V V ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :E ("t") 0 l{) ("f) N N OJ l.(') c.o t{) 0 CD 0 <{ 0'> l.{) l.{) ("t") v t- O V CD N N 't'"- N V -.:- j ~ Cf) 1:5 0 <( 0::: 19 ~ S:2 w CD () "C =It .... <1) .... 0:= u.. CL 0 CO "'C Z ~ W 0 0 ~ N l{) LO c.o 0 0 V N 0 t- L1. 0 0 N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (fJ N N 0 0 0 0 0 0') ..q ~ V or- -.:- U Z ~ T- N N N N N en ..q L() ("f) "Q'" ('l") 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c.o en ~ ~ ~ ~ <{ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... -.:- T- T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" N N N N N N l.{) l.{) l.{) l{) l{) l{) L() l() LO L() L() L() L() I I I I I I I I I I I I I T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" or- T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" or- "0r- a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C? ~ ~ ~ C? ~ 0 C? q ~ ~ ~ .... 0 0 N V 0 ,...... 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 m v v T""'" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ("f) 0 1.0 C't) N N co to c.o L() 0 CD 0 <t m lC) L{) C") I V I I t- o V c.o N 0 N T""'" f I I N V T""'" ~ I I I I I f I LL ~ :E 0 W =It 0:= L1. .... L1. Z 0:: 0 0 T""'" N l{) l{) co 0 0 V N 0 0 en ~ 0 0 N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W N T""'" 0 0 0 0 0 ('l'") 0 T""'" V 0 or- Z L1. T""'" T""'" N N N N N "or- V L() V ('f) ('l") 0 U) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -.::t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 <t ~ 0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 N "or- N N N N N C\I C\I N T""'" N N L{) l{) lC) L() LO t.() LO LO L.() lC) lC) L() LO l- t- J I I I I I I I I I I I I T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" T""'" "or- "or- T""'" T""'" T""'" or- or- J- C/) W ~ L- co (!) C/) CL -CI) -<1) Q) E c EI (.) c C> e co 0 C Q) co :J ~ J= CD E e -C/) a E Q) CD m (J) Q) .9- > ~ ~ 0> Q) 0 -CI) co L- 0 ~ L- co co 0- (J) a. C 2 a.. ~ e W ,.::s:; E 0) Q) 0 I L- E E e ~ ~ co ~ .~ 0 .Q -0) CL L- Q) ;g J= co Q.) CJ) c.. E co > l.- e Cl.. 0 ~ Z C Q) (.) <1) co 0 L- ~ 0 L- a> c.. p J= ~ c.. ~ (.) 0::: E i= a Q) x ~ E (.) a:: L- w ..9 c t- ex: (.) ~ Q.) .Q ~ 0 Z <( 10 L- J:: .8 en u C .9 co <t c i$: E 0) Q) a... 000) ..J L- a -CI) Q.) P E <.) C I (.) c.. co ~ Q) c ,9- Q) Q) ....... J C >< C) Q) E 0::: '5.. ro w 0) co ..c =:s E c L- a cr .8 co Q) (.) ~ o.!S L... ill .9- P 1;; Q) ~ =:s 0:: en - L- rr E Q) -Q) E a W E co .8 0 x CJ) 0 ..0 0 2 L... 19 c L- eo "'0 J= 00 (f.) c (f) ~ 0) ~ -I C Q) Q) Q) Q) c.. Q) 1:5 =:s 0) ~ Q) Q) 0> Q) X 0> 0 0> E eo c ~ W c co L- c .c ~ co 0 co L- 0> co Q) .Q.. ..c ~ () ..c C ~ ..c > ~ /~. <.) .~ (.) 0 co (J I 0- m c E ~ C P ~ c :rg w Q) Q) =:s Q) c.. ::J Q) Q) :::J .5. c.. > 0 > =:s 0 > > 0 co ~ 0 (.) 0 Q) (.) 0 0 (.) ~ Q) E <.) E (.) E E (.) co (/) co co (J) C() W 0> I t- (.) < Q.) c 0 ( MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 1. 1998 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 11-E1 REQUEST: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: JANICE SMITH - INVESTMENTS AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: US WEST: 'k/5 .~~) lA; Ov ,~~ (J ~f ~ \rf n) (~~ "p ft" ~({) itS CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: 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: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMA liON: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 ~ ~~ 00 I~ 0") CT) -r- .~ ~ .... ~o u ~~ ~~ LLJ ~ C ,..... 0 :e ~ o ZLL ct~ -w eLL 0:::", Wz :e~ u-.... o ~t:i -C) (.)0 :J OJ :E ~ o zu. S C 0::: w ::E LL o ~ (.) ( 0::: w LL rn Z ~ I- .... W ~ C ::) CO w 0 ~ C) Z W <( Z ::J: (.) 0 0 LO 0:: .... cD E LO 0 <( W 0 0 ~ .... LO E cO c <( LO t:R- E i!i 0 0 0 a- LL 0 ~ C I I ::s a- e 0 0 .! ~ ~ (.) en Lri r.ri u c ~ ~ <( f! ~ ~ l- e 0 co co ci 0> 0 ~ C'fl e 0 0 co ~ e e CD ~ co LO (J) 69- ri cO .C: C) ~ LO Co ~ C ~ W L- :;; EA- CD 0 ~ 0 c: Ol c: ::l W ..0 0 c: Q) (J U) +:; Z ~ ::l ~ CO c: 0 :c ::l :J CD 0 ~ c: a.. -.... :E (,) ;; C/) () c: ~ .f: <( Z :J CO :5 0 (!) ::l C/) .f: (,) ~ Q) ~ E C) (J) n. .5 co Q) >< 0 ;: C) W Q) ..::: (f) ~ (J) ~ Q) ::R .C: C) 0 a. eo ctJ t--.. '#. L- eo Q) ~ ~ Q) ('t) ... ('t') c: Q) -c > ... W ..0 Q) co ::l en E CD ~ c. CD :J C) -c -c C> c:: "'C S 3 ctJ ... :J 0 0 ~ c: OJ ;: ;: ::J :!::: 0 16 (f) (J) c. (,) ... :E :E (,) ~ rJ) <( I-- I-- W CX) 0) ~ I (,) Q) C 0 ( E X P E H D I T U RES PERCENT APPROPRIATlctI THIS I10NTH TO DATE EXPENDED , --- ~ISE FUNDS- ------------~--:------ ,,[:.(10/ If'" . ----- --- c;11't'}'\---- - - - H . . .. - n 60-0415.11H18 WAGES - ACCOONTI~7 :3.:>?; .,. 1 ^ '] 1,;;7 .-e.ee- 4, 648. ~)\ h 4,648.84 - ~15.1~18-----WAGES~- MUBS- .f.;1-Li- --. ----. 11?!~l--l']g,38ti.8L-.-- 7,930.85 -- - - 7,930.85 60-0415.18-21 FICA TAXES - ItJBS 13,838.08 %2.34 %2.34 ~ - 60-0415.18-22 STATE RETlREI'ENT - ItJBS 19, 788.08 1,229.03 1,229.83 -', -- ~15.18-24--~ W(RKt'IANS.-etmP~ ~ 1tJ8S~----~-~~---- -----Ja0.98 .--- -~- - .0.88~---.-.---~ 0.08 _.~._ ___ 68-0415.18-25 BLlE CROSS/DEL TA DENTAL - ItJBS 33,898. 9B 2,050.85 2,058. as 60-0415.18-26 CITY DIe DEDUCTIBLE - rtJBS 6,400.00 159.22 159.22 : - u60-8415.18-28.--~ UtelPLOYJIENT-~ ~ I'IUBS----- --~ -- -- --l,aaa.~---- e.aa-~ -- ----.- 9.09 68-0415.18-31 OPERATlON EXPENSE - rtJBS 25,000.08 1,126.49 1, 12b.49 ., ~ 68-9415.10-37 POSTAGE & MILING - ItJBS 48,500.88 2,743.54 2,743.54 - -. -~ - ~15.1~48----TRAVEl:~fIEET1HGS~EDUCATION-DLES-----~----4,580.88-----._- 50.80... -..... _.~.- - 50.90- ---- 68-0415.18-50 JANITORIAL MINT & SUPPLIES 8, 900. 89 625. 88 625.80 ", -- 68-0415.18-51 PHONE EXPENSE - MUBS 4,500.80 322.83 322.83 - --.~15.10-52~ -P!lER - IIftIBS -_.~------1,580.89--- 264.97-- _~__-~ .. 264.07~- u. 60-0415.18-53 INTERIOJ.ITAIH GAS - I'IUBS 0.88 0.88 0. aa · - - 60-0415.18-62 CONTRACT LABCR 3,000.88 0.80 0.88 ~- -- "-6H415.~1__. BUILDltIi-MIHIDIANCE~ - 1tlBS.______ ---- -1,000.00___._.~ -- 0.89-------- 0.00~ "_ _ . 68-9415.48-42 AUDIT SERVICES 5,000.80 0.08 0.89 . _: 60-0415.50-92 BANK CHARGES (OVER/UNDER) 600.00 ( 713. G2) ( 713.62) . ~-_6H415.90_::a8~CAP1TAlJlUTLA'L.:'"..MUBS_~____~_~u__15,900--9L---u ..0.00_ ___ ____ ~__ 8.88. __ _ TOTAL mJBS 354,200.88 21,398.64 21,398.64 '" CITY OF MERIDIAN . MONTIl. Y - BUDGET REPORT OF EXPEND ITmES Through PERIOD - 1 - Ending 10/31/98 , REPORT DATE - 12/01/98 . . . . .. . .- - - .. .- . - 9 . ." . ~ 4.7% 7.4'/. 6.2% 0. 0%~" .-- 6.0% 2.5% 0. 0%. - 4.5% 6.8% 1.1% 7.8% 7.2% 17.6%--- ---~-- 0.0% 0.0%. --- - - 0.8% N/A 9.8%.__ __ _ 6.0% PAGE - 9 UNEXPENDED BALANCE 4,648.84) 162,369.15 " 12,867.66 18,550.97 - ~-- - 300.00- 31,83'3.95 6,248.78 1, aaa. B0- 23,873.51 37,756.46 4,458.80 -- 8,275.80 4, In. 17 1,235.93--- 0.08 3,880.00 1,000.88 5,080.80 1,313.62 15,080. aa _ . 332,801.36 'i: FM5 FM6 FM7 FS20 FS26 FS29 FS30 FS39 FS40 ( Bank CDs 97-98 CITY OF MERIDIAN General Fund Farmers & Merchants -cds Interest Due Bank Name Fund CD# Date CD AMOUNT Rate Date Farmers & M 1 60021227 6/11/98 $123,926.08 5.330/0 12/9/98 Farmers & M 1 41627 3/31 /98 $552,269.28 5.29% 9/28/98 Farmers & M 1 40727 2/18/98 $376,094.13 8/21/98 GENERAL FUND TOTALS: $1,052,289.49 FIRST SECRURITY Interest Due Bank Name Fund CD# Date CD AMOUNT Rate Date First Security 1 2847985 12/16/97 $153,847.47 6.16% 12/16/99 First Security 1 2848257 3/23/98 $116,488.80 5.59% 9/23/98 First Security 1 2848329 4/13/98 $116,564.21 5.59% 1 0/20/98 First Security 1 2848220 4/7/98 $115,924.02 5.590/0 10/8/98 First Security 1 2848336 4/16/98 $108,820.48 5.590/0 1 0/27/98 First Security 1 2848233 2/27/98 $500,000.00 5.54% 8/27/98 GENERAL FUND TOTALS: $1,111,644.98 U.S. BANK W012 W013 u.s. Bank I 1 I 443 2/9/98 $500,000.00 2/9/99 U.S. Bank I 1 I 20000449 12/23/97 $113,889.53 5.700/0 12/23/98 GENERAL FUND TOTALS: $613,889.53 HOME FEDERAL SAVINGS H F2 I Home Fed .Sv I 1 I 30033311 12/3/97 $192,573.661 5.95%1 12/3/98 1 -, , -" ..L "'+..1 ~ . .~._,._ ;'GI;N'ER.b;6FltNfl, . . Tota.~f~I,I;PR'$ " .$:2-'.9103.971'66:1 ., '"';L.J,... ......... , ........- ,.:" f "-,~. .-.C .s.,.:;, Invest.Fund e I (! tn-lff RECEIVEI DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIA ~ Page 1 FS1 FS2 FS4 FS5 FS6 FS7 FS8 FS11 FS12 FS13 FS14 FS15 FS16 FS17 FS18 FS19 FS21 FS22 FS23 FS24 FS27 FS28 FS31 FS32 FS33 FS34 FS36 FS37 FS38 FS41 FS42 HF1 HF3 (-,. Bank CDs 97-98 CITY OF MERIDIAN I CDs Enterprise Fund First Security -CD Interest Due Bank Name Fund CD# Date CD Amount Rate Date First Security 60 2848259 3/25/98 $147,613.98 5.59% 9/25/98 First Security 60 2848191 2/31 /98 $145,938.55 5.59% 8/4/98 First Security 60 2603179 2/13/97 $149,818.73 5.87% 8/13/98 First Security 60 2768171 9/18/97 $187,265.18 5.87% 9/18/98 First Security 60 2768170 9/18/97 $152,625.40 5.870/0 9/18/98 First Security 60 2603168 2/10/97 $169,710.05 5.870/0 8/10/98 First Security 60 2768135 8/28/97 $195,352.48 5.870/0 8/28/98 First Security 60 2848282 4/28/98 $143,726.49 5.59% 11/1/98 First Security 60 2848219 4/3/98 $121,403.75 5.59% 1 0/2/98 First Security 60 2848328 4/10/98 $201,903.63 5.590/0 10/16/98 First Security 60 2848337 4/20/98 $190,420.11 5.590/0 11 /3/98 First Security 62 2768341 11/5/97 $137,390.97 6.160/0 11/5/99 First Security 60 2848386 6/4/98 $174,240.12 5.87% 6/4/00 First Security 60 2848363 5/28/98 $164, 111 .24 5.870/0 5/29/00 First Secu rity 60 5/21/98 $161,665.24 5.530/0 5/21/99 First Security 60 2848384 6/3/98 $192,368.32 5.87% 6/3/00 First Security 60 2848382 6/4/98 $156,576.42 5.87% 6/4/00 First Security 60 2848387 6/4/98 $156,576.42 5.87% 6/4/00 First Security 60 2848388 6/4/98 $156,576.42 5.87% 6/4/00 First Security 60 2920348 6/11/98 $158,477.15 5.870/0 6/11/00 First Security 60 2920387 7/28/98 $114,872.52 5.590/0 1/27/99 First Security 60 2603171 8/6/96 $105,940.63 5.870/0 8/11/98 First Security 60 2848343 5/5/98 $118,457.86 5.590/0 11/4/98 First Security 60 2768344 11/7/97 $115,249.47 6.160/0 11/7/99 First Security 60 2848353 5/1 5/98 $119,118.95 5.590/0 11 /13/98 First Security 60 2768133 8/28/97 $116,260.40 5.87% 8/28/98 First Security 60 2768143 9/5/97 $116,234.63 5.87% 9/5/98 First Security 60 2768151 9/11/97 $143,275.89 5.87% 9/11/98 First Security 60 2768169 9/18/97 $143,440.76 5.87% 9/18/98 First Security 60 2848234 2/26/98 $500,000.00 5.640/0 2/27/99 First Security 60 2848193 2/17/98 $112,211.41 5.590/0 8/18/98 ENTERPRISE FUND TOTALS: $4,968,823.17 HOME FEDERAL Interest Due Bank Name Fund CD# Date CD Amount Rate Date Home Fed.Sv 62 3003366 12/3/97 $174,743.35 5.950/0 12/3/98 Home Fed.Sv 60 303358 12/3/97 $204,886.44 5.950/0 12/3/98 ENTERPRISE FUND TOTALS: $379,629.79 continued on page 3 Invest.Fund Page 2 ( ( ( Bank CDs 97-98 W01 W02 W03 W04 W05 W06 W07 W08 W09 W010 W011 W015 u.s. BANK Interest Due Bank Name Fund CO# Date CD Amount Rate Date U.S. Bank 60 444 2/9/98 $236,194.71 5.600k 2/9/99 U.S. Bank 60 20000207 2/10/97 $137,601.26 5.50% 8/10/97 U.S. Bank 60 20000476 1/21/98 $144,925.39 5.80% 1/21/99 U.S. Bank 60 20000477 1/21/98 $144,628.82 5.800/0 1/21/99 U.S. Bank 60 20000437 9/17/97 $170,893.26 5.800/0 9/15/98 U.S. Bank 60 20000441 10/14/97 $118,462.21 5.650/0 10/14/98 U.S. Bank 60 20000388 1 0/6/97 $118,318.54 5.650/0 1 0/6/98 U.S. Bank 60 20000438 9/29/97 $156,997.58 5.80% 9/29/98 U.S. Bank 60 20000442 12/8/97 $183,360.72 5.70% 12/8/98 U.S. Bank 60 20000448 12/23/97 $138,441.73 5.70% 12/23/98 U.S. Bank 60 20000474 1/21/98 $111,390.65 5.800/0 1/21/99 U.S. Bank 60 196638 8/22/98 $5,969,491.41 5.650/0 2/22/99 ENTERPRISE FUND TOTALS: $7,630,706.28 continued from page 2 WF1 WF2 WF3 WF4 WASHINGTON FEDERAL Interest Due Bank Name Fund CO# Date CO Amount Rate Date Wash.Fed.Sv 60 8100272 9/24/97 $235,942.52 5.59Ok 9/24/98 Wash.Fed.Sv 60 8100355 10/15/97 $142,749.83 5.800/0 Wash.Fed.Sv 60 8100280 9/7/97 $141,918.30 5.70% 9/7/98 Wash.fed.Sv 60 8100074 3/10/98 $186,748.99 5.55% 3/10/99 ENTERPRISE FUND TOTALS: $707,359.64 FM1 FM2 FM3 FM4 Farmers & Merchants -cds Interest Due Bank Name Fund CO# Date CD AMOUNT Rate Date Farmers & M 60 60001127 1/27/98 $120,179.52 5.29% 7/28/98 Farmers & M 60 60001027 1/27/98 $119,896.48 5.290/0 7/28/98 Farmers & M 60 50976986 2/16/98 $157,394.59 5.290/0 8/17/98 Farmers & M 60 60008127 6/17/98 $123,889.80 5.330/0 12/15/98 ENTERPRISE FUND TOTALS: $521,360.39 IdaholndependentBank-cds Interest Due Bank Name Fund CO# Date CD AMOUNT Rate Date 60 8/22/98 $500,000.00 5.29% 2/22/99 .ENTERPRISE<FUN[) .. ......TcotaI6faILCD.~: .......~~4,7'Oi,8'7~;~7; Invest. Fund page~~ .3 ( Bank CDs 97-98 CITY OF MERIDIAN I CDs FIRST SECURITY BLDG. FUND FS3 FS25 FS35 Interest Due Bank Name Fund CO# Date CD AMOUNT Rate Date First S:~curity 50 26031Se 2/10/97 .$14a~~58~2:8 5:870/0 8/1 0/98 First S_ecurity 50 .2~48004 12119/97 $151,-181.18. 6,160/0 12/19/99 First Security 50 2768142 9/5/97 $116,234.63 5.870/0 915198 BLOG.FUND TOTALS: $417,074.09 FIRST SECURITY alill:~{"'>FFFF. "',111I Invest.Fund Page 4 CITY OF MERIDIAN-Checking Accounts (Nonactive) u.s. Bank eking account: Enterprise Fund I Balance as of 7-7-98: $790,552.95 I First Security cking account Enterprise Fund I Balance: as of 7-7-98 $201,853.90 I $992,406.85 Total in eking: ( tic fnh;r RECEIVED DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN d1rfJtr 11' ( ] J J J J ,I J J J J J RECEIVED DEe - 1 1998 Fee Schedule and Agreement CITYOFMERIDIAN ~ Seattle-Northwest proposes that its compensation be in the form of a discount per purchased transaction approximating 2/32 payable upon closing. There will be no fees charged for out-of-pocket expenses representing actual incurred costs for travel, express charges or similar items. The proposed fee will compensate Seattle-Northwest for all services provided to the City in connection with the management of its investments. Those services are listed in Section 3 of this Proposal. Additional services provided in connection with projects unrelated to the investment process will be provided at the request of the City. Fees for such services are subject to negotiation and may be based on hourly rates or other mutually acceptable meth ods. -;I!' J J J J J ~i~ z~~Jg ~~;~~~~ Seattle-Northwest .;,,* ~ (! ~f.; ;'-c; ~~1%Ai~;i~~i; Securities Corporation ~ ~ ~ ( RECEIVEr DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDW SCHEDULE B Fee Scbedule for Fixed Income Investment Management Services Buffington Mohr McNeal $0 - $25,000,000 .25% Over $25,000,000 Ne otiable l. . j . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Management fees will be assessed at the beginning of the month or quarter. New accounts and terminated accounts will be charged a pro-rata fee for the period of time that assets are under management. In the event of termination of an agreement where fees have been paid in advance, a prorated refund will be made. Accounts may be terminated by either party with five (5) days written notice. Compensation for other services shall be on an hourly rate negotiated with the client. ~2 ;: ; ceo ~ (: C C :. 0 C 0/'255 6 2 J 5 0 [} ~ (: 0 ;. ( 1 3 } {) 0 C j O. 0 (1 ~ c c 1 ~ 20% i 5 6 : 0 0 i) .. r; n ~.~ \\NfSER VER\COMP ANY\File Opening\Schedule B.doc I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I - \ RECEIVED DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN \JfFliNGTO ~ MOHR l\r ~\cN E.A\L REGISTERED -INVESTMENT- ADVISOR OWRVlIlEW Of SJERVlI<ClES fOR J AmCE SMIJIlH TRIEASUJPffiR CITY Of MERID][AN Historic Hoff Building, 802 West Bannock Street, Suite 100 P.O. Box 2016, Boise, Idaho 83701, Toll-Free: 1-888-383-5551, Telephone: 208-338-5551, Fax: 208-338-5552 ( 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: WATER DEPARTMENT: 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: DECEMBER 1, 1998 ~oV yl~ ~ ~~ All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: DECEMBER 1.1998 APPLICANT: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER: B REQUEST: RESOLUTION #205 - USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT (APPROVED 11/17/98) AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: SEE Altt:\.CH-EO 1Z6-soLut I au CITY POLICE OEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: WATER DEPARTMENT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: 1/V arf {YJ ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: 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. RESOLUTION NO () D 5 BY: Ro rz.- /lh-d.ej-f t771-- 6~ (ot(,,/YL ed-~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, SETTING FORTH CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN AND ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, A CONTRACT ENTITLED "USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT", BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, AND BITTERROOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION. 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 a contract with BITTERROOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., an Idaho corporation, denoted as "USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT", 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 contract. 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 contract with BITTERROOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., an Idaho corporation, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, AUTHORIZING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH BITTERROOT CONSTRUCTION entitled "USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT" a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and to bind this City to its terms and conditions. PASSED BY ~HE COUN~OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this IS]? day of 'e/?v~ , 1998. APPROVED BY THE MAY~F THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, IDAHO, this /B? day of 'jvy~ , 1998. CCc n (L:( --MAYOR ;((Er/~EAlr (?Ir( COt/NCIL ATTEST: ITY CLERK 112598-Final \\\1HH H Ht,'!!! \\\ ~~,.." "1 0,,\'\'- or l'r.i.:qt~:(~ '1.1 ,~'.L~ ~. - .~o~~~~1P)'/~ , ~,~-- .~ _.~ ~ ~ ,. ~-....~. ft1h' ~ ~. "- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- v ~ [ SEAL ~ :"Y. ~J g : v()} ~Qr' " .~ ~ 70 USr 1S~ t ~~ ~~ ...../ ~~1 ^~ " //1;, Co .,. ~ ...,,~ /1... ,UN l~' \" "1/ \\\ IllflHtj n'\\\\ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, AUTHORIZING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND PURPOSES, AUTHORlZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK. TO SIGN AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH BI1TERROOT CONSTRUCTION 2 (, CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN I, the undersigned, do hereby certify: 1. That 1 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 ~ords a.nd minutes and do hereby certify that on the / Sf? day of 'Ce11v.be.A-- , 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 AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN AND ENTER INTO, ON BEHALF OF SAID MUNICIPALITY, A CONTRACT ENTITLED "USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT", BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, AND BITTERROOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., AN IDAHO CORPORATION. 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 a contract with BITTERROOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., an Idaho corporation, denoted as "USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT", 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 contract. CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN 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 contract with BITTERROOT CONSTRUCTION, INC., an Idaho corporation, entitled "USTICK RESERVOIR DRAIN LINE CONTRACT", a copy of which is attached hereto marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution a..nd .to bind this City to its terms and conditions. - \ \ \ \ { ( 4 f f('-(I J / ; j /.' . ,\\ C "I.~ 'I,'; ....~,. aT Nt~i),' II~ ......,.... ~~ '"'~.~ r..tr. ~ ~' c} ~'Oft4 vV~, ~ ~o 1(-<> ~ 11 ~ ~ -. ~.r-: j6( ~ SEAL ILLlAM G. BERG, JR. ~ i"G-_ ,f ~ ~ ,\;.~ "..D ;::: ~ -;'<) Sr 1S~ · ~ ~ STATE OF IDAHO;~~/J1 Cou TV ~ ",~ -II~. N \' \\\. . · s~ \' · l' J 1/ II HI .n \ \1; \ \ . County of Ada, ) . On this ) 51- day of Dee f /YJ by/" I in the year 1998, before me, ~~{l t\ ~ (e h. f G It<; <;. , a Notary Public, appeared WilliAM G. BERG, JR., known or identified to me to be the City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Idaho that executed the said instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same on behalf of the City of Meridian. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. (SEAL) ,,'111""111 \" eL"" \' C l:- · G I, ~,~\ eoQ0'e~@~ A1.~'~ "" "ta~ t"e U' ~~ :: ~ t!J~ 0" u" "';. 2""": 0 111 tr ~ 1-., ~~ ~ i: 'l~ y~; ~ .... Q I.' .'. = g A C;? '...> :.: :. o<;'~ t.1 I.' (-! n , \..J:j :: -:. .' \:__ .; l"j~. /; ~ '":.. ' 1........ ...':/ (" ...... ........ (:t. v.;:-... ~ .....1.) ~ ...J ... ~,-,\.1)1.:;;:2"e''::'='::'':,,",\ \ ~v~ ,....... , 6-.. j r- C;", , t.,:, ...' '~/.,: I.J . 1'/ \~\\" f1'"U:Il'\ Public for Idaho ission Expires: CERTIFICATE OF CLERK OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN 2 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF) CLAYTON HARTZ, dba FASHION FLOORS ) & INTERIORS, 126 KING STREET, THE ) APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE ) PERMIT FOR A RETAIL CARPET STORE, ) MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW This matter coming before the City Council on the 17th day of November, 1998, without a public hearing, pursuant to S 11-2-418 E of the Municipal Code and the Council having reviewed the record of the proceedings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and being fully informed in the premises makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivisions and Development Ordinances codified at Title 11 Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21, 1993, Ordinance #629 - January 4, 1994 and Maps. 2. Staff has complied with the requirements ofI.C. 9 67-6509 and 67-6512 and S 11- 2-416 E and 11-2-418 E. 3. The Applicant is Clayton Hartz whose address is 1700 N. Laurel, Boise, Idaho 83705 and 313 W. Cherry Lane, Meridian, Idaho. The location of the subject property is 126 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 1 King Street, Meridian, Idaho 83642. 4. The record owner of the subject property is Nancy J. Spencer. 5. The legal description of the property is as follows: Lots 16, 17 and 18 in Block 6 of BOWER'S ADDITION TO MERIDIAN, according to the official plat thereof, filed in Book 2 of Plats at Page 62, Official records of Ada County, Idaho. 6. The present land use of subject property is residential. 7. The proposed land use of subj ect property is for a floor covering store with parking area in front and behind the existing garage. The existing residence would be converted to show rooms and storage according to the proposed site plan. 8. The present zoning district of subject property is (OT) Old Town. 9. The property is occupied by a home which is nicely landscaped and is surrounded by residential use. 10. The residents of the immediate neighborhood wish to keep the use of the premises residential and not place a retail store in the middle of the residential neighborhood. 11. All the property south of King Street between East 1 st and 2nd is residential except for a hub cap store which is on East 1 st Street. 12. That retail stores are allowed in the (OT) Old Town District as a conditional use. 13. The proposed use will not be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The subject request for conditional use and proposed development relates and is in conflict of the goals and policies and provisions of the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian as follows: 13.1 To ensure that growth and development occur in an orderly fashion in FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 2 accordance with adopted policies and procedures governing the use of land, residential development the provision of services and the distribution of new housing units within the Urban Service Planning Area. [Goals of the Comprehensive Plan, Goal 2 at Page 5] 13.3 Within the community there are unique neighborhoods which comprise the Meridian urbanized area. Only a few of these areas have traditional neighborhood characteristics. Others are essentially developing districts and contain some elements of traditional neighborhoods, but at present they lack nearby parks, schools, churches, and commercial support services. In time, the developing districts will become neighborhoods as the community continues to expand and develop neighborhood facilities and services. [Population Growth, Existing Conditions at Page 6] 13.4 Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, (East First Street, Cherry Lane, Fairview Avenue, Franklin and Meridian Roads) and include small commercial centers and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. [Land Use, Commercial and Retail at Page 21] 13.5 Protect and maintain residential neighborhood property values, improve each neighborhood's physical condition and enhance its quality of life for residents. [Residential Policies g2.3U at Page 23] 13.6 The central core of Meridian is the Old Town area, which includes a healthy mix of retail, office, industrial and residential uses. The Comprehensive Plan encourages continued mix of business and residential uses within the Old Town. In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and development standards. These standards consider, among other aspects: Traffic Volume and Type Trip Generation Impacts on Arterial Street System Proximity to Other Commercial Development Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas Accessibility of Site Parking Demands Pedestrian Circulation Available Utility Systems Aesthetics (Design Considerations) Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 3 Internal Circulation Design Drainage [Commercial Activity Centers, Old Town at Page 25-26J 13.7 Discourage isolated neighborhood commercial development in residential areas unless the uses are compatible with the Planned Neighborhood Conunercial designation. [Conunercial Policies 9 4.5U at Page 26J 13.8 Limit the conversion of predominately residential neighborhoods to nonresidential uses, and require effective buffers and mitigation measures tlrrough Conditional Use Permits when appropriate nonresidential uses are proposed. [Neighborhood Identity Goal Statement, Policies 9 6.4U at Page 74J 13.9 Adopt and implement neighborhood policy plans to preserve and/or improve existing neighborhoods. [Neighborhood Identity Goal Statement, Policies S 6.6U at Page 74J 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 9 65-6512 and pursuant to S 11-2-418 of the Municipal Code of the City 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 State. 4. The property is currently zoned (OT) Old Town. The (OT) Old Town is described in the Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B 12 as follows: "(OT) Old Town District: The purpose of the (OT) District is to accormnodate and encourage further expansion of the historical core of the community; to delineate a centralized activity center and to encourage its renewal, revitalization and growth as the public, quasi-public, cultural, financial and recreational center of the City. A variety of these uses integrated with general business, medium-high to high density residential, and other related uses is encouraged in an effort to provide the appropriate mix of activities necessary to establish a truly urban City Center. The district shall be served by the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of the City of FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 4 Meridian. Development in this district must give attention to the handling of high volumes of traffic, adequate parking, and pedestrian movement, and to provide strip commercial development, and must be approved as a conditional use, unless othetwise permitted." 5. The Zoning Schedule of Use Control as contained in the Zoning and Development Ordinance of the City of Meridian, 9 11-2-409, provides and regulates the type of use allowed as either a permitted use or a conditional use. In the (OT) Old Town zone retail stores require a conditional use permit. 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 9 11-2-418 H Municipal Code ~fthe City of Meridian and Idaho Code 9 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 is 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 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 5 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 City Council 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 not be harmonious with and in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and this Ordinance; c. The use is not designed, constructed, operated and maintained to be harmonious and appropriate in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not change the essential character of the same area; d. The use will be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future neighboring uses; 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 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; FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 6 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 use will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural or scenic feature of major importance. 11. That the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian, adopted December 21, 1993, as Ordinance #629 - January 4, 1994, provides as follows: 11.1 To ensure that growth and development occur in an orderly fashion in accordance with adopted policies and procedures governing the use of land, residential development the provision 'of services and the distribution of new housing units within the Urban Service Planning Area. [Goals of the Comprehensive Plan, Goal 2 at Page 5] 11.2 Within the community there are unique neighborhoods which comprise the Meridian urbanized area. Only a few of these areas have traditional neighborhood characteristics. Others are essentially developing districts and contain some elements of traditional neighborhoods, but at present they lack nearby parks, schools, churches, and commercial support services. In time, the developing districts will become neighborhoods as the community continues to expand and develop neighborhood facilities and services. [Population Growth, Existing Conditions at Page 6] 11.3 Commercial and retail areas are established along major arterials, (East First Street, Cherry Lane, Fairview Avenue, Franklin and Meridian Roads) and include small commercial centers and individual businesses. Uses include retail, wholesale, service, office, and limited manufacturing. [Land Use, Commercial and Retail at Page 21] 11.4 Protect and maintain residential neighborhood property values, improve each neighborhood's physical condition and enhance its quality of life for residents. [Residential Polices S 2.3U at Page 23] 11.5 The central core of Meridian is the Old Town area, which includes a healthy mix of retail, office, industrial and residential uses. The Comprehensive Plan encourages continued mix of business and residential uses within the Old Town. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 7 In all cases, the locations of Commercial Activity Centers should be guided by performance and development standards. These standards consider, among other aspects Traffic Volume and Type Trip Generation Impacts on Arterial Street System Proximity to Other Commercial Development Impacts on Neighborhood Residential Areas Accessibility of Site Parking Demands Pedestrian Circulation Available Utility Systems Aesthetics (Design Considerations) Use Impacts Upon Other Adjacent Uses Internal Circulation Design Drainage [Commercial Activity Center, Old Town at Page 25-26] 11.6 Discourage isolated neighborhood commercial development in residential areas unless the uses are compatible with the Planned Neighborhood Commercial designation. [Commercial Policies ~ 4.5U at Page 26] 11.7 Limit the conversion of predominately residential neighborhoods to nonresidential uses, and require effective buffers and mitigation measures through Conditional Use Permits when appropriate nonresidential uses are proposed. [Neighborhood Identity Goal Statement, Policies ~ 6.4U at Page 74] 11.8 Adopt and implement neighborhood policy plans to preserve and/or improve existing neighborhoods. [Neighborhood Identity Goal Statement, Policies ~ 6.6U] ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL NOW, THEREFORE, BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND THIS DOES ORDER that: 1) The applicant, Clayton Hartz, is hereby denied a FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 8 ( conditional use permit. Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code Section 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a permit authorizing development may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. APPROVAL OF ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves this ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL. DECISION OF DENIAL ROLL CALL COUNCILMAN KEITH BIRD VOTED i t3 iA COUNCILMAN RON ANDERSON VOTED t.-t Gb\ COUNCILMAN CHARLIE ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCILMAN GLENN BENTLEY VOTED V1~ MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) MOTION: APPROVED: C~ I ~ ,-,6 VOTED DISAPPROVED: 113098-Final RECEIVED DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 9 NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a [mal action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a variance authorizing lot frontage allowance may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. ttt l FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 10 l NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code S 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a variance authorizing lot frontage allowance may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date oftrus decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION OF DENIAL - CLAYTON HARTZ CUP IN OT - 10 BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION) OF WHITESTONE DEVELOPMENT, ) COMPANY, L.L.C. THE APPLICATION ) FOR A VARIANCE FOR WHITESTONE ) ESTATES NO.3, SOUTH OF FRANKLIN ) ROAD AND WEST OF LINDER ROAD, ) MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF DECISION The above entitled matter coming on regularly for public hearing before the City Council on the 17th day of November, 1998, and the City Council having received the record made before the Planning and Zoning Connnission on this matter and having heard the testimony presented, and being fully advised in the premises does hereby make the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order of Decision, as follows to-wit: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The City Council takes judicial notice of its Zoning, Subdivisions and Development Ordinances codified at Title 11 Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and all current zoning maps thereof and the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Meridian adopted December 21,1993 Ordinance #629 - January 4, 1994 and Maps. 2. Notice of public hearing was given in accordance with the requirements of Idaho Code 99 67-6509, 6516 and 99 11-2-419 E and Section 11-9-612 (1) (b) as evidenced in the record of this matter. WHITESTONE ESTATES NO. 3 VARIANCE - FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS & ORDER OF DECISION - PAGE - 1 3. The Applicant is Whitestone Development Company, L.L.C. whose address is 8850 N. Gadwall, Boise, Idaho 83714, who has established proof of ownership or valid option on the real property. 4. The legal description of the property is as follows: All ofLat 4 Block 7, Whitestone Estates Subdivision No.2 and a portion of the West half of the East half of the Northeast quarter of Section 14, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho (See Exhibit "A" attached hereto.) 5. The present land use of subj ect property is vacant field. 6. The proposed land use of subject property is residential. 7. The present zoning district of subject property is (R-4) Low Density Residential District. 8. That a vicinity map of the proposed development to a scale approved by the City Council showing property lines, existing streets, proposed district and such other items as required has been furnished. 9. It is not applicable to this application to have a schematic building plan. 10. The Applicant requests a variance of the provisions of S 11-9-605 (F) of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian and the Zoning Schedule of Bulk and Coverage Controls S 11-2-410 A Municipal Code requiring in an R-4 zone minimum street frontage on a cul-de-sac lots of 40 feet measured as a chord measurement and 80 feet otherwise to a 3D-foot street. 11. The special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that make strict compliance with the provisions of the above referenced ordinance impracticable or unreasonable are: WHITESTONE ESTATES NO. 3 VARIANCE - FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS & ORDER OF DECISION - PAGE - 2 11.1 This application for variance was necessitated in order to comply with Ada County Highway District's request to re-design the intersection of South Lodestone Avenue and West Pintail Drive. 11.2 The Ada County Highway District required a re-design of the "snoopy" turnaround at the intersection of South Lodestone Avenue and West Pintail Drive to a "knuckle" turnaround, similar to the "knuckle" turnaround proposed at the intersection of South Whitestone Way and West Pintail Drive. The proposed "snoopy" turnaround in the July preliminary plat submittal was to minimize the relocation of existing utilities. To accommodate the District's request, Lots 11 and 12 Block 7 lot street frontages were reduced to 30 feet. The 25-foot wide emergency access to the school property reduces the frontage available for providing 40- foot wide street frontages for these two lots. Lots 6 through 9 Block 7 lot lines were not adjusted due to the existing utilities service stubs to each lot. Water, sewer, power, telephone and gas lot services were constructed during the development of Whitestone Estates No.2 Subdivision to provide services for Lots 6 through 9 Block 7. In the time period between the construction of the Whitestone Estates No.2 Subdivision improvements and the submittal of Whitestone Estates No.3 Subdivision preliminary plat, the Joint School District No.2 purchased 12 acres of Whitestone Estates for a school site located south of the proposed Whitestone Estates No.3 Subdivision. The School District owns a 25-foot wide emergency access from the public street in Whitestone Estates No.3 Subdivision to the school site. This emergency access will be paved, have bollards installed to control vehicular access and utilities will be constructed within this access. An eight-inch water main will be extended to the school site. The sewer will be either a six- or eight-inch pipe depending on the proposed school development. The School District is in the process of designing and developing the 12-acre parceL 12. That strict compliance with the City ordinance requirements on street frontage would result in extraordinary hardship to the Applicant because of the unusual circumstances found herein in Finding No. 11. 13, That granting of the requested variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the subject property is situated. WHITESTONE ESTATES NO. 3 VARIANCE - FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS & ORDER OF DECISION - PAGE - 3 14. The granting of the requested variance will not violate the provisions of the Idaho Code. 15. The granting of the requested variance will not have the effect of nullifying the interest and purpose of the City's Subdivision Ordinance and/or the City's Comprehensive Plan. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The City of Meridian has authority pursuant to the enactment of the Local Land Use Planning Act of 1975 codified at Chapter 65, Title 67, and in particular, by the provisions of Idaho Code S 67-6516 to provide as part of its zoning ordinance for the process of applications for variance permits. 2. The City of Meridian has exercised its authority of Idaho Code S 67-6516 by the enactment as a part of its Zoning and Development Ordinance variances, as set forth in S 11-9-612 of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 3. That the requirements for the processing of a variance request are set forth in Idaho Code SS 67-6509,6516 and SS 11-2-416E and 11-9-612B Municipal Code of the City of Meridian. 4. Application and standards for variances are set forth in S 11-9-612A Municipal Code of the City of Meridian, and the findings which are required are set forth in S 11-9-612A(b)-(e) as follows: 4.1 That strict compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the subdivider because of unusual topography, the nature or condition of adj acent development, other physical conditions or other conditions that make strict compliance with this Ordinance unreasonable under the circumstances, or that the conditions and requirements of this Ordinance will result in inhibiting the achievement or objectives of this Ordinance; WHITESTONE ESTATES NO. 3 VARIANCE - FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS & ORDER OF DECISION - PAGE - 4 4.2 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; 4.3 That such variance will not violate the provisions of the Idaho Code; and 4.4 That such variance will not have the effect of nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan. ORDER OF DECISION BASED UPON THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND TIllS DOES ORDER that: Whitestone Development Company, L.L.C. is hereby granted a variance to Lot 11 and Lot 12, Block 7, to allow 3D-foot wide lot frontages of the proposed Whitestone Estates No.3 Subdivision. NOTICE OF FINAL ACTION Please take notice that this is a final action of the governing body of the City of Meridian. Pursuant to Idaho Code 9 67-6521 an affected person being a person who has an interest in real property which may be adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a variance authorizing lot frontage allowance may within twenty-eight (28) days after the date of this decision and order seek a judicial review as provided by Chapter 52, Title 67, Idaho Code. WHITESTONE ESTATES NO. 3 VARIANCE - FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS & ORDER OF DECISION - PAGE - 5 APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby adopts and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: COUNCILMAN BIRD VOTED ---=t. ~ COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED 46Jtt COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED_ COUNCILMAN ANDERSON VOTED~14- MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED_ APPROVED: ~~ DISAPPROVED: 120198 - Final -/2-( -7'6 RECEIVED DEe - 1 1998 CITY OF MERIDIAN WHITESTONE ESTATES NO. 3 VARIANCE - FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS & ORDER OF DECISION - PAGE - 6 ./ '\ 1295 S. Eagf~ Flight Way Boise. ID 8370l) (208) 378-6387 Fax C20~) 378-0025 .I / PROJECT: 527380 DATE: July 16, 1998 WHITESTONE ESTATES SUBDIVISION NO.3 DESCRlPTION FOR WHITESTONE ESTATES SUBDIVISION NO.3 ALL OF LOT 4 BLOCK 7, WHlTESTONE ESTATES SUBDIVISION NO.2 AND A PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 14, TO\VNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO A parcel of land being all of Lot 4, Block 7, VVhitestone Estates Subdivision No.2, and a portion of the West Half of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, To\vnship 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly as follows: Beginning at an iron pin marking the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of Section 14, thence along the easterly boundary of said Northeast Quarter of Section 14, said easterly boundary also being the centerline of South Linder Road, South 00033 '08 " West 1491.59 feet to a po int; thence leaving said easterly boundary and centerline, North 89013' 17" West 664.72 to a 2" galvanized iron pipe marking a point on the Westerly boundary of Van Hees Subdivision as filed for record in the office of the Ada County Recorder, Boise, Idaho, in Book 19 of Plats at Page 1222, and marking the easterly boundary of Whitestone Estates Subdivision No.2 as filed for record in the office of the Ada County Recorder, Boise, Idaho, in Book 75 of Plats at Pages 7742 and 7743; . thence along said westerly and easterly boundaries, South 00033'43" West 161.61 feet to an iron pin, said iron pin being THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing along said westerly and easterly boundaries, South 00033'43" West 168.83 feet to a point on the northerly right-of-way of the Kennedy Lateral; thence leaving said westerly and easterly boundaries and along said northerly right-of-way the following courses and distances; thence North 89026'17" West 129.79 feet to a point; thence South 74022' 13" West 400.90 feet to a point; thence North 84024'50" West 50.20 feet to a point; thence North 89025' 42" West 100.00 feet to a point; thence leaving said northerly right-of-way, North 00034' 18" East 80.00 feet to an iron pin marking the Southwest comer of Lot 7, Block 5, of said Whitestone Estates Subdivision No.2; thence along the southerly boundary of said Whitestone Estates Subdivision No.2 the following courses and distances; thence South 89025' 42" East 150.00 feet to an iron pin; PO-cifie L.1I1d Surveyors. a division of PO\VER Engin~ers. Inc.. an Idaho Corporarion e JC'~";+" A" thence North 00034' 18" East 36.11 feet to an iron pin marking a point of curve; thence along a curve to the right 31.42 feet, said curve having a central angle of 90000'00", a radius of 20.00 feet, tangents of 20.00 feet and a long chord of 28.28 feet bearing North 45034'18" East to an iron pin marking a point of tangent; thence South 89025'42" East 73.52 feet to an iron pin marking a point of curve thence along a curve to the left 133.90 feet, said curve having a central angle of22014' 17", a radius of 345.00 feet, tangents of 67.81 feet and a long chord of 133.07 feet bearing North 79027' 1 0" East to an iron pin marking a point of tangent; thence North 68020'01" East 99.89 feet to a point marking a point of curve; thence leaving said southerly boundary and along a curve to the right 15.74 feet, said curve having a central angle of 45005'46", a radius of20.00 feet, tangents of 8.30 feet and a long chord of 15.34 feet bearing South 89007'06" East to a point marking a point of reverse curve; thence along a curve to the left 121.43 feet, said curve having a central angle of 135005'46", a radius of 51. 50 feet, tangents of 124.63 feet and a long chord of95.19 feet bearing North 45052'54" East to an iron pin; thence N arth 85040' 0 1" East 115.61 feet to the point of beginning. EXCEPTION: . . A parcel of land being a portion of the West Half of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 3 North, Range 1 Wes~ Boise Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and more particularly as follows: Beginning at the afore described iron pin marking the Southwest comer of Lot 7, Block 5, of said Whitestone Estates Subdivsion No.2; thence along the southerly boundary of said Whitestone Estates Subdivision No.2, South 89025'42" East 125.00 feet to an iron pin, said iron pin being THE REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence contin~ing along said southerly boundary South 89025'42" East 25.00 feet to an iron pin; thence leaving said southerly boundary South 00034'18" West 84.39 feet to a point on the northerly right-of-way of the Kennedy lateral; thence along said northerly right-of-way North 84024' 50" West 25.10 feet to a point; thence leaving said northerly right-of-way North 00034' 18" East 82.20 feet to the point of beginning. Said parcel contains 1.66 acres more or less, excluding the above described exception. E-4:bil ",1 · SUBJECT TO: All existing easements and road rights-of-way of record or appearing on the above-described parcel of landw Prepared by: PACIFIC LAND SURVEYORS DGP:beb Don G, Payne, P.L.S. Milt:" -,.. BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF STEINER DEVELOPMENT, APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.8 SUBDIVISION, PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 SEC. 3, T. 3N., R. 1W., MERIDIAN, IDAHO ) ) ORDER OF CONDITIONAL ) APPROVAL OF ) PRELIMINARY PLAT ) ) This matter coming before the City Council for public hearing for Preliminary Plat approval pursuant to 9 11-9-604 E of the Municipal Code of the City of Meridian on this 1 st day of December, 1998 and the Council finding: That notice of public hearing has been given in accordance with the City Ordinance; and; The administrator's report on the status of the application has been received and is complete which has included certain comments and conditions as stated in a letter dated October 7, 1998, to the Mayor and Council from Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, listing 9 General Comments and 6 Site Specific Comments which are herein found fair and reasonable; and Considering the proposed development it is found to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City; and Subject to the conditions of approval the proposed development is found to have Urban Services to accommodate it and it is in continuity with the City's Capital Improvement Program and there is existing public financial capability of supporting services for the proposed development; and ORDER OF APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT STEINER DEVELOPMENT THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.8 SUBDIVISION c The Council having considered the requirements of its subdivision ordinance and requirements for preliminary plat approval the Council takes the following action: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1.) The Preliminary "Plat of The Lake at Cherry Lane No.8 Subdivision" as evidenced in Plat bearing the job reference #Pacific Land Surveyors, ACAD DWG. File: 549429\CHR8PRE1 DWG. NO. 980806.1 Revised 10/27/98 is Conditionally Approved subject to those conditions as set forth in the letter dated October 7, 1998, to the Mayor and Council from Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to the City Engineer, and Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator, listing 9 General Comments and 6 Site Specific Comments, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto marked Exhibit "AJJ and by this reference incorporated herein. 2.) The preliminary plat upon which there is contained the Certification and signature of the City Clerk and the City Engineer verifying that the plat meets the City's requirements shall not be signed until the conditions of this approval herein imposed are met. By action of the City Council at its regular Zj g held on ~ec~mber 1, 1998. By: l ~ T D. CORRIE Mayor, City of Meridian Copy served upon Applicant, the Planning and Zoning Department and the Public Works Departmen . Dated: /2-!-t'fe ORDER OF APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT STEINER DEVELOPMENT THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.8 SUBDIVISION 2 ivb.yor ROBERT D. CORRIE HUB OF TREA.5URE VALLEY A Good Place to Live LEGAL DEPARTrvlENT (208) 884-4264 Council Members CITY OF MERIDIAN CHARLES ROUNTREE GLENN BENTLEY RON ANDERSON KEITH BIRD 33 EAST IDAHO MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 · Fax (208) 887-4813 PUBLIC \VORKS BUILDlNG DEPARTlvlENT C"!OS) 887-2211 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTivlENT (208) 884-5533 MEMORANDUM: October 7, 1998 To: Mayor, City Council, Planning & Zoning Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer ~ Shari Stiles, P&Z Administrator~ From: Re: THE LAKE AT CHERRY L.ANE NOe 8 SUBDIVISION (Request for Preliminary Plat Approval by Steiner Development, Ince) We have reviewed this submittal and offer the following comments, as conditions of the application. These conditions shall be considered in full, unless expressly modified or deleted by motion of the Meridian City Council: GENERAL CO:M1vfENTS 1 e Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing the property to be included in this project, shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605eM. Plans will need to be approved by the appropriate irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users association, with written confirmation of said approval submitted to the Public Works Department. No variances have been requested for tiling of any ditches crossing this projecte 2e 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-S17e Wells may be used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape irrigatione 3e 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. 4e Submit copy of proposed restrictive covenants and/or deed restrictions for review by the Meridian City Attorney. 5. Provide 5' wide sidewalks in accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-606eBe 6e Submit letter from the Ada County Street Name Committee, approving the subdivision and street namese Make any corrections necessary to conforme 7. Coordinate fire hydrant placement with the City of Meridian's Water Works Superintendent. Lake at CL NoS doc (~-- Mayor, Council and P&Z October 7, 1998 Page 2 8. Indicate on the fmal plat map any FEMA Flood Plains affecting the area being platted, and detail plans for reducing or eliminating the boundary. 9. Respond in writing, to the each of the comments contained in this memorandum by 5:00 P.M. of the Monday prior to the scheduled hearing by the Meridian Planning and Zoning. Submit ten copies of the revised Preliminary Plat Map to the City Clerks Office a minimum of one week prior to the hearing by the Meridian City CounciL SITE SPECIFIC CO~NTS 1. Sanitary Sewer service to this site will be via the existing main that traverses through the development. 2. Water service to this site will be via extensions of existing mains installed in adjacent developments. Applicant will be responsible to construct the water mains to and through this proposed development. Subdivision designer to coordinate main sizing and routing with the Public Works Department. 3. Indicate any existing ditch easements on the preliminary plat map, including location and width. 4. 100 watt high pressure sodium street lights will be required at locations designated by the Public Works Department. All street lights shall be installed, at subdivider's expense. Typical locations are at street intersections and/or fire hydrants. 5. Applicant has indicated that the pressurized irrigation system within this development is to be a continuation of the existing system owned and maintained by the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. 6. Please show all improvements on the preliminary plat map, ie. Curb, gutter and sidewalks Lake at CL NoS.doc