HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 10-21ROLL CALL:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
X WALT MORROW
X GLENN BENTLEY
X MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE
X CHARLIE ROUNTREE
X RON TOLSMA
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD OCTOBER 7,1997:
(APPROVED)
MARCH FOR PARKS CHECK PRESENTATION
1. TABLED OCTOBER 7,1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED TO NOVEMBERS, 1997)
2. TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 -- COMMISSIONS, BOARDS,
COMMITTEES: (TABLED TO NOVEMBER 5, 7997)
3. TABLED OCTOBER 7, 7997: ORDINANCE #761 TRAFFIC SAFETY
COMMISSION: (TABLED TO NOVEMBER 5, 1997)
4. TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: ORDINANCE #775 -VACATION OF GENTRY
WAY: (TABLED TO NOVEMBERS, 1997)
5. TABLED OCTOBER 7,1997: ORDINANCE #776 -BUILDING &PLANNING
AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: (TABLED TO NOVEMBER 5, 1997)
6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO.:
(APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION)
7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR LUMBERMAN'S BUILDING CENTER - 415 E. BROADWAY:
(APPROVE AMENDED FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION)
8. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR AN OFF PREMISE SIGN BY WILLIAM T. RITTER, DDS - 317
W. CHERRY LANE: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION)
9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION BY BENCHMARK LAND CO.:
(TABLED TO NOVEMBER 5, 1997)
10. ORDINANCE #777 - TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION:
(APPROVED)
11. TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR TURNBERRY
SUBDIVISION BY BENCHMARK LAND CO.: (TABLED TO NOVEMBER 5,
1997)
12. ORDINANCE #778 -LEE CENTERS REZONE: (APPROVED)
13. ORDINANCE #779 -TREE ORDINANCE: (TABLED TO NOVEMBER 5, 7997)
14. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 7, 1997: REQUEST FOR A
VARIANCE TO THE REQUIREMENT TO TILE THE SAFFORD LATERAL BY
GOLFVIEW ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: (TABLED TO
NOVEMBER 5, 1997)
15. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 7,1997: REQUEST FOR
A CHILD CARE/PRESCHOOL FOR 8 TO 10 CHILDREN BY TYIA LOFTON -
2261 E. KATELYN: (WITHDRAWN FROM AGENDA; APPLICANT NO SHOW
FOR PUBLIC HEARING)
16. FINAL PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 7,59 LOTS BY STEINER
DEVELOPMENT: (APPROVED -APPROVE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
AND CC&R'S)
17. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CINDI'S FLORAL IN
THE FRONT PORTION OF THE OLD ZAMZOWS STORE BY CINDI'S FLORAL
- 611 E. 1ST STREET: (APPROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION)
18. REQUEST FOR APRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR RAMA SUBDIVISION BY
B-11 LLC -INTERSECTION OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND CENTRAL VALLEY
DRIVE: (APPROVED)
19. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND CC&R'S FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY
LANE NO.6 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: (APPROVED)
20. TULLY PARK IMPACT FEE OFFSET AGREEMENT: (APPROVED)
21. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
A. GARY SMITH, CIN ENGINEER:
1. BID RESULTS FOR WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING: (APPROVE CONNOLLY
CONSTRUCTION)
2. CHANGE ORDER: ASHFORD GREENS LIFT STATION -SEWER
SEWER LINE REPLACEMENT: (APPROVED)
B. CHIEF GORDON, POLICE DEPARTMENT:
1. PAYMENT OF BILLS TURNED IN LATE: (APPROVED)
C. WALT MORROW, CIN COUNCILMAN:
1. AGENDA FOR SPECIAL WORKSHOP:
2. GENERATION PLAZA CONSTRUCTION:
D. GLENN BENTLEY, CITY COUNCILMAN:
1. POLICE DEPARTMENT TRANSFER OF FUNDS FOR PURCHASE
OF POLICE CARS: (APPROVED)
E. CHARLIE ROUNTREE, CITY COUNCILMAN:
1. LETTER TO BUREAU OF RECLAMATION FOR FIVE MILE
CREEK R -O -W: (APPROVED)
2. ANNEXATION OF FUTURE PARK AND SEWER PLANT:
(APPROVED)
F. MAYOR CORRIE:
1. JUDGES AND CLERKS FOR ELECTION: (APPROVED)
2. AGREEMENT WITH IRS: (APPROVED)
3. LETTER TO 4 CITIES THAT HELPED WITH IRS: (APPROVED)
4. TRANSFER FUNDS FROM CAPITAL OUTLAY TO STAFF
($5000 APPROVED)
22. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
MERIDIAN CIN COUNCIL OCTOBER 21 1997
The regular meeting of the Meridian city Council was called to order by Mayor Robert
D. Corrie at 730 P.M.:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Walt Morrow, Ron Tolsma, Charlie Rountree, Glenn Bentley:
OTHERS PRESENT: Wayne Crookston, Will Berg, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, chief
Gordon, Tammy DeWeerd, Dave & Tina Olson, Russ Hepworth, Mike Clevers, Lonnie
Fox:
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD OCTOBER 7,1997:
Corrie: Any corrections or alterations of those minutes? I will entertain a motion that
they be approved as written.
Morrow. So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to be approved as written, all those in favor's
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #1: TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION:
Corrie: Council, how do you (inaudible)
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, Point of confusion, does Ashford Greens have two. one thing we
have been waiting the ditch ordinance to be done.
Crookston: That is this one.
Morrow: okay fine, so there is no paint, we would again table this until our first meeting
in November which would be 5 because of election on 4. So I would move to table to
November 5#h.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to table item #1 to November 5, any further
discussion? All those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ttrrff r.....
t r.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 2
MARCH FOR PARKS CHECK PRESENTATION:
Wendt: I am George Wendt, the President of the Treasure Valley Volksports club in
Boise. Last year we contacted a couple of the council members here and they referred
us to the Meridian Parks and Recreation people, namely Tammy Deweerd and Dave
Costello. what we do is the March for Parks is a program to make people aware of the
need for developing and maintaining and improving parks. Every year for the last three
years we have done different parks. This year we thought Meridian would be a good
candidate and they were very receptive to it. so we put together the Volksport club was
primarily responsible for doing the walk, laying out the walk, it is a 1 OK and a 5K walk.
We had it sanctioned by the American Volksport Association out of Texas. That was
our main effort in this thing. But we were astounded you might say, Tammy and Dave
took the ball so to speak and really put together and with a lot of effort and spent hours I
know contacting people, getting people involved the schools, organizations, business
and the public as well as the media. At the end of our walk which we thought was very
successful we turned in a report to the National Parks and Conservation Association
and stating all what we had done and listing all of the media contacts and involvement
with the other people that I previously mentioned. out of the 1200 March for Parks
events last year this Meridian March for Parks was selected as the best overall event of
the 1200. With that they finally got around to getting us a check which is made out to the
Meridian Parks & Recreation Department. And we want to present it to you. I do think
the city of Meridian really owes Tammy Deweerd and Dave Costello a lot of the effort
they put into this. Without what they did we wouldn't have won this award. We know
how to put walks on but we don't have the people and resources to go out and do what
they did. So I think they really deserve a big hand.
DeWeerd: And of course l can't go without comment. I wanted to again thank the
Council for letting us go forward with it. Also this has put Meridian on the map we will be
used as their promotional event for all of their advertising for the March for Parks events
corning up in 1998. so Meridian will be promoted nationwide.
Corrie: I would suggest that we all give them a round of applause for that.
Rountree: I would like to take a minute and thank George for bringing this to the city of
Meridian. And Tammy and Dave and the businesses in the city and the citizens of
Meridian for making this a success. Good job.
Corrie: Thank you very much.
ITEM #2: TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 —COMMISSIONS,
BOARDS, COMMITTEES:
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, my pleasure here in terms of these ordinances which we just got
updates tonight and also the question in terms of the commissions, Boards and
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 3
Committees if I recall there Was a letter sant to the Attorney General for a request for an
opinion. I have never heard what the response from that was. It would seem to me to
make sense to table items 2 through 5 so that We can clean all of these things up once
and for all at our planning meeting on the 29th. Two, three, five and 13 to our meeting
on the 5th of November.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we table items 2, 31 5, and 13 ordinances until
November 5, any further discussion? All those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All lea
ITEM #4: TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: ORDINANCE #775 —VACATION OF
GENTRY WAY:
Corrie: AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE EXISTING TEN FEET WIDE PUBLIC
UTILITY DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION EASEMENT ADJUSTMENT TO GENTRY
WAY IN LOT 12 AND LOT 13, AMENDED MAGIC VIEW SUBDIVISION, A
SUBDIVISION IN MERIDIAN, IDAHO AND RECORDED IN THE RECORDS OF ADA
COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there
anyone from the audience that would like to have Ordinance #775 read in its entirety?
Hearing none I will entertain a motion on Ordinance #775.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, comment from staff?
Stiles: Does this ordinance now include the right of way?
Corrie: This (inaudible) public utility and drainage and irrigation easement. (Inaudible) I
will entertain a motion that this ordinance #775 be tabled until November 5th we don't
have it.
Crookston: I would inform the Council that this Was handed out at the last meeting but
there were two ordinances there and apparently the one that you people picked up and
read was not the correct ordinances. But both ordinances Were in your boxes. My
secretary Marlene St. George handed the final ordinance to Will approximately at 4:45
because I had made the changes at his request.
Berg: The one that is attached to the cover sheet that you had marked September 15th
that is the one prior to the change for the public right of way. Wayne is correct, the most
updated one Was just put in your box without a cover sheet and you had it in your box in
time for the council meeting last meeting. But it was not attached to a cover sheet so
that is Why the confusion from last meeting. Is that correct Wayne'
Crookston: Yes it is.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
'age 4
Morrow: Well anyway Mr. Mayor to move things along, given there is confusion by the
Council it seems to me to be appropriate to table this (inaudible) and then move forward
after every one on the Council is comfortable with the ordinance and where we are at
with that. So I would move to table to November 5.
Rountree: second
Corrie: Motion and a second to table item 4 to November 5th, any further discussion? All
those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #6: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO.:
Corrie: Council, you have the findings of fact and Conclusions of law, any questions on
that?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the findings of fact and conclusions
of law.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded we approve the findings of fact and conclusions of
law, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow --Yea, Tolsrna --- Yea, Rountree — Yea, Bentley — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Entertain a motion on the decision.
Marrow: Mr. Mayor, the variance for a block length (inaudible) and a variance for piping
the Ridenbaugh Canal, Eight Dile Lateral and Nine Mile Drains for Sherbrooke Hollow
Subdivision is hereby granted.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded on the decision as read, any further discussion? All
those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
#
Meridian city Council
October 21, 1997
Page 5
ITEM #7: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR LUMBERMAN'S BUILDING CENTER — 415 E. BROADWAY:
Corrie: Council, any questions?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, points of discussion With respect to these findings of fact and
conclusions. We had some discussions at length last time concerning the property and
the fact that the bearing right of ways the issue With respect to being leased property
and so on and so forth. Item #17 in the findings of fact says that it is concluded that the
variance should be granted provided the applicant submits a landscape and screen and
buffer plan to the Planning and Zoning Administrator showing how the applicant
proposes to provide screening and buffering (1 naudible). In fact there are no homes that
surround the lumberyard there are homes across the street. The issue With respect to
landscaping in front of the building there is currently landscaping that has not been
maintained but would be with the occupations of Lumberman's. I don't see given the
fact With What also was there on the street that any additional landscaping Would be
needed. This goes onto say that the plan may show less than a 20 foot strip but it must
show that there Will be sufficient screening and buffering for the neighbors for the
neighbors. The pian may be submitted to the Council if the Planning and Zoning
Administrator believes that it should be approved by the Council. Well the point is along
that area having just come from there this evening those for the most part are all
asphalted areas Where there is currently parking. There is landscaping in front of the
building that currently exists. It talks about a 20 foot strip there is no place there the 20
foot strip Would work and not interfere With right of way and access to and from the
business. I am generally supportive of the findings of fact and conclusions with the
exception of paragraph 17.
Corrie: Any other Comments from Council?
Rountree: To that point and I agree With how Wait summarized that, the applicant did
indicate however that they Would be making some improvements in some of the
landscaping that existed and some of the conditions that existed. I think they talked
about doing something with the chain link fence to screen off their yard. I think that is on
record, I think that is their intent, I believe that is their intent. If we need something in the
findings of fact to represent that intent I have no problem With the deletion of item 17
With something substituting for their intent. If we can take their testimony that Would
satisfy me as well.
Tolsma: I agree With Walt and Charlie myself.
Stiles: I like it the Way it is Written.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I am prepared to move that we approve the findings of fact and
conclusions of law amending or striping item 17 on page 8 and adding a paragraph that
indicates that the City requires the cleaning and enhancement of existing landscaping
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page B
and the chain link fence screening inserts as testified to by Ed Pierce in his
presentation.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made to approve the findings of fact and conclusions with striking item
17 and inserting the comments about the city requiring improvements by the
landscaping and seconded, any further comments? Roll call vote
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Tolsma -Yea, Rountree — Yea, Bentley — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: I will entertain a motion for the decision.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that the City Council decides the variance to the
requirements to provide curb, gutter, sidewalks and the requirement for a 20 foot
planting strip by Lumberman's is granted provided that Lumberman's submit and
continue with their pledge in the testimony to do landscape improvements and
improvements to the yard fencing.
0
Morrow: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded on the decision as read, any further discussion? All
those in favors Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #8: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR AN OFF PREMISE SIGN BY WILLIAM T. RITTER, DDS — 317 W.
CHERRY LANE:
Corrie: council, you have the findings before you, any discussion or comments? I will
entertain a motion for the findings.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the findings of fact and conclusions
of law as written.
Tolsma: second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow Yea, Tolsma — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Bentley — Yea
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 7
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Entertain a motion on the decision?
Bentley: Mr. Mayer, it is decided the application for variance to the off premise sign
prohibition by applicant William Fitter is granted provided the sign is constructed exactly
as depicted in the plans submitted. That it is no taller, no wider and shall not have any
business listings lower than 10 feet from the ground.
Marrow: second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded on the decision as read, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION BY BENCHMARK LAND CO.:
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, with respect to Turnberry Variance I am going to ask for a table on
that because at this point in time there is a conflict between Briggs Engineering and
their calculations with respect to the diameter of pipe and Nampa Meridian's
calculations. They have talked to City Engineer smith, I would ask him at this time to
explain the just of that conversation. We have not received anything in writing from them
so I am hesitant to approve of disprove anything without seeing that in writing.
smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, I talked with John Anderson Monday morning
to request clarification on a letter that was written to Mayor and Council concerning a
letter written by Nampa Meridian to the Mayor and Council concerning this variance
request. I did that because the letter we received from them was not specific in the
reply as to whether or not this ditch could be piped with 48 inch pipe and carry the
amount of water. John Anderson subsequently visited the site and took some elevations
and called me later Monday afternoon to say that it was his opinion the pipe could be 48
inch diameter and perhaps smaller and carry the flow in the ditch. There is a question
or was a question as to the status of a check up structure about 250 feet south of this
properties northwest corner. Mr. Anderson informed me that check up structure is not a
weir but it is simply a structure used to raise the water level, to slow the velocity of the
water down in the ditch to prevent erosion. The ditch could be piped to the northwest
corner of this property and that structure could be removed. With the removal of that
structure the allowable head across the length of the south and west boundary of this
property increases approximately twice of what was originally was calculated or what
was used by the engineer in calculating the required pipe diameter. He was writing a
fetter to me, dictating a letter as we spoke Monday afternoon. I have not received the
letter, I called this afternoon and only got their answering machine and left a message
for him to fax me a copy of the letter and I didn't receive a reply.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 8
Morrow. If it is agreeable with the Council I would move that we table until November Stn
the variance request for Benchmark Land Co. pending the arrival of the letter from
Nampa Meridian.
Tolsma: second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to table item #g by
Benchmark Land Co., any further discussion?
Rountree: I guess my question is how long do we hold this up for Nampa Meridian to
respond?
Morrow: only to the 5th.
Rountree: So if we don't receive anything by the 5t" it is not pending (inaudible)
Morrow: That is correct. The intent of this motion is they have until the 5t" to perform. At
that point in time the council will take action. If they don't perform we %4 11 not hold the
private sector up anymore.
Corrie: Any further discussion? Hearing none, ,all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #1 B: ORDINANCE #777 — TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION:
Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND LYING
IN THE NE %4 OF THE SE '/4 OF SECTION 4, T.3N, R.1W, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone
from the audience that would like to have Ordinance #777 read in its entirety?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve ordinance #777 with the suspension
of rules.
Tolsma: second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we approve ordinance ##777 with the
suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow —Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 9
ITEM #11: TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR TURNBERRY
SUBDIVISION BY BENCHMARK LAND Co.:
Morrow: The purpose of tabling this at our last meeting was to wait for the annexation
ordinance to be approved. However given the fact that we are tabling the variance
request which may impact the preliminary plat it seems to me to make a certain amount
of sense to table this to the 5th also and then act on it at that point in time.
Corrie: is that a motion Mr. Morrow?
Morrow: I will make it so.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Toisma to table item 11 until
November 5, any further discussion? All those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #12: ORDINANCE #778 —LEE CENTERS REZONE:
Corrie: AN ORDINANCE of THE CITY of MERIDIAN AMENDING AND CHANGING
THE ZONING of CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY of MERIDIAN WHICH
IS GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS 1.80 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IN THE SE %, NE
%I NE % of SECTION 13, T.3N. R.1W, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO;
AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the audience that
would like to have ordinance #778 read in its entirety? I will entertain a motion on
Ordinance ##778.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would move we adopt ordinance #778 with suspension of rules.
Morrow: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Morrow that ordinance #778 be
approved with the suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma -- Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 7, 1997: REQUEST
FOR A VARIANCE TO THE REQUIREMENT TO TILE THE SAFFORD LATERAL BY
GOLFVIEW ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP:
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 10
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and continue the public hearing and
request a member of the Safford Lateral variance request come forward.
Russ Hepworth, EHM Engineers, 4418 Clinton Street, Boise, was sworn by the city
Attorney.
Hepworth: Since our last meeting I have contacted the Nampa Meridian Irrigation
District to determine the flow which they require if this was to be piped. we have also
gone out and shot the slope of that so that we could determine the sizing of pipe. I have
gone upstream and checked the size of pipe that is coming out and also a section of the
pipe meaning the pipe I could find that was tiled. Everything that I did find was 48
inches. I have calculations, I talked to them also, they require concrete or steel CMP
pipe. I have calculations for the Boo feet that we would have to be tiling and the slope
given that is there that we would have to maintain that we would it would be required for
concrete 51.5 inches the next size up would be a 80 inch pipe DMP or 55.8 inches
inside diameter and the next available size is Bg inch CMP would be required to be put
in there. The concrete pipe was the one that could come the closest to the 48 inches
and it is all depending on your (Inaudible) your roughness factor and the pipe that would
be putting in there would probably be a bell and spicket. So we are assuming a rough N
value in our calculations. It is pretty much determined on that N value what type of
material you are putting in. It could be at a 48 inch size pipe if it is assumed that it is a
smooth flow through the whole piping section. Now these calculations haven't been
given to Nampa Meridian so I don't know their status. I have these calculations here that
have been performed by a professional engineer if you would like a copy of that
Marrow: Mr. Mayor, question Mr. Hepworth, it is my understanding that what you just
said was that Nampa Meridian has not given you or confirmed these calculations. city
Engineer Smith has not had an opportunity to review that either?
Hepworth: No he has not.
Corrie: Anyone else from the audience that would like to enter testimony at this time?
Council, staff comments, questions, discussion?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, my discussion here would be two points. One is that obviously we
need confirmation of these calculations by City Engineer smith and Nampa Meridian.
The second issue is that Ms. Stiles makes note in her memo to us dated the 12th that
this is adjacent to the Ashford Greens property, the Ashford Greens variance is being
held pending the adoption of an irrigation ordinance that we are currently working on. It
is my understanding it is their desire to do some sort of water amenity and Ms. Stiles
states in her paper very well that it would make a certain amount of sense to coordinate
the two subdivisions in fact there was going to be a water amenity in one. It seems to
me that it is appropriate here that after we close the public hearing that we may move to
table pending the resolution of the measurement issues and the receipt of the proposed
Meridian city council
October 21 7 199'
Wage 11
ordinance which Ms. Stiles and Mr. Smith are to have for us at our strategic planning
meeting on the 28th.
Corrie: Any further comments? Hearing none I will close the public hearing. Any further
discussion? I will entertain a motion to your effect Mr. Morrow.
Morrow. I would move to table to November 5th.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made to continue this, are you asking for a continue of the public
hearing or just continue this? okay, continue the discussion until November 5th, any
further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, as a point of clarification for Mr. Hepworth, what we are doing is
tabling until the information comes in. Then November 5th we would instruct the city
Attorney to draw up findings of fact and conclusions.
ITEM #15: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 7, 1997: REQUEST
FOR A CHILD CARE PRESCHOOL FOR 8 TO 10 CHILDREN BY NIA LOFTON —
2261 E. KATELYN:
Corrie: I will open the public hearing at this time, is there a representative of the child
preschool here tonight? Shari did they know about this tonight as well? They were
notified.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, if memory serves me this is the second failure to show by these
folks, I would move that we remove it from the future agenda.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Just a minute, is there anybody else from the public that would like to issue
testimony in this?
[have Olsen, 2145 East Katelyn, Meridian, was sworn by the city Attorney.
Olsen: 1 just want to go on record and state that I don't know if the decision has been
made or not to decline this. I am opposed to it for the increased traffic on a very small
street in a subdivision. It is not a through street and by allowing ten children it would
increase the traffic flow a lot. There is only 18 houses on the street counting both sides
of the street. I just want to go on record again, thank you.
fl`l
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1 99?
Mage 12
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Olson, anyone else from the public that would like to issue
testimony?
Mike Levers, 2159 East Katelyn Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Levers: Besides agreeing with Mr. Olsen as to what he said, I would like to also state
that I am not in favor of a day care in our neighborhood for numerous reasons. one I
brought our covenants to Kearney Place Subdivision which I can give to you for
evidence but it clearly states in here that no business is to be operated in the
neighborhood other than an occasional garage sale. I think twice a year it allows for a
garage sale. These folks moved into the neighborhood with knowledge of the these
covenants and then want to change it to have a business in the neighborhood. That
coupled with the fact our street doesn't lead anywhere it circles around to another drive.
It would increase the traffic dramatically. There are at least 18 children in half a block
area there, that if there were ten cars driving in and out of the subdivision twice a day to
drop off and pick up that is 20 extra cars through there with 17 kids in the neighborhood.
don't feel that is particular safe. That coupled with the fact we wouldn't know who
these people are. only Mrs. Lofton would know, I don't feel secure having strangers in
my neighborhood that I don't know who they are with my daughter six years old. She
plays out in the front where there is kind of a little culdesac. There is a map in here too
you can look at it. It is sort of a culdesac type deal where kids ride their bicycles and
play, it is out of the traffic but it is part of the street. For those reasons I am opposed to
them opening a day care in our neighborhood also.
Corrie: Anyone else that would like to issue testimony at this time? Seeing none, any
further discussion council before I close the public hearing?
Morrow. My only paint of discussion is my motion was out of order, I missed the
continued part of the public hearing. So I will withdraw that at this time. And say that it is
appropriate that from my perspective in terms of discussion I did not wish to continue
the public hearing awaiting them to testify. They have had two opportunities and so it
makes sense from my standpoint to go ahead and close the public hearing.
Corrie: At this point I will close the public hearing. we have the decision that you can
make now Mr. Morrow.
Morrow. My motion would be that this item be dropped from the agenda for failure of the
applicant to appear on two occasions and offer testimony in support of their own
application.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion is made and seconded that we drop the request for a child care
preschool conditional use permit, any further discussion? All those in favor? opposed?
t.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 13
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #18: FINAL PLAT FOR THE LADE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 77 59 LOTS BY
STEINER DEVELOPMENT:
Corrie: I guess the final plat, would you like to say anything?
Bradbury: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council I am Steve Bradbury I have been
asked to present the final plat for the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 7 this evening. I really
don't have a whole lot of presentation to make. I understand you have a packet of all of
the materials that were submitted about a month ago. It is probably worth pointing out a
couple of modifications that were made from the preliminary plat to the final plat just so
that you will know that they are there. Many of these were as a result of requirements
that were made or conditions that were imposed upon the approval of the preliminary
plat. The first is that the right of ways have been widened from 40 feet which was
originally proposed to 42 feet as required by the Council and that would include a 5 foot
sidewalk on one side of the street also as approved by the Council. And in addition in
order to provide a little bit more room for some setbacks and to provide for some
staggering of the building fronts along the streets of the subdivision the lot depths not all
of them but most of the lot depths were increased from 99 feet to 101 feet. And you can
see the dimension as shown on the final plat. That allowed for that staggering to take
place so we have a minimum setback of 18 feet up to as much as 21 feet. Most of the
lots again were increased in width from the originally proposed and approved 33 feet to
35 feet. That is with exception of some of the interior lots. when I say Interior lots I
mean lots that are on the inside of the triplex of fourplex unit. So we have all in all the lot
sizes on average have grown. The number of lots was reduced from 80 to 58 that
enabled some of this extra room to be utilized for the streets and other purposes. The
parcel itself that these comprised that takes the preliminary plat the width of that was
increased by 13 feet and that is where the extra right of way and the extra lot depths
footage came from. That added about 8000 some square feet to the total plat. The unit
sizes that are proposed for approval are in the 1200 square foot plus range. That was
approved at preliminary plat 1180 square feet. So all in all what we have is a project
with less density, larger lots on average, and larger units than what you originally saw
back at the preliminary plat stage. It is my understanding that Mr. Campbell met with
Gary and Shari and Bruce for design review purposes presented to them three elevation
choices that would be used throughout the project. That is also something that the City
Council requested as a condition of approval for preliminary plat. That also showed the
staggered setbacks and I think you have a drawing in there in your package that shows
that. That is also my understanding that you folks may have already seen those
elevations as well. Keith Jacobs the project engineer has responded to the staffs
comments by his letter of October 17, 1997. 1 expect that you probably have a copy of
that somewhere in front of you. I think and I guess now is the time that we find out that
everything is in order with respect to those issues. There was one additional item that
wasn't addressed in the letter that was addressed as an item that we tried to show to
you folks (End of Tape) driveway treatments would work. (Inaudible) You have before
Meridian city council
October 21, 1997
Page 14
you two sets of drawings, one is for a typical, depicting lots 45, 46 and 47 triplex that
looks like this and the other one is depicting 34, 35, 36 another triplex, they are slightly
different. The intention here is to provide common driveways for those lots that have a
little bit of a narrower frontage on the streets. So that there is enough room for cars to
enter and exit from those driveways and make what ever turning maneuvers are
necessary. In essence, in general the driveways as they connect to the street will be
about 14 feet plus or minus. some of them are a little bit larger than 14 feet others just
slightly less than 14 feet wide. But all in all on average we are talking about 14 feet. We
don't have separate drawing of lots 48 and 49 but the proposal for them would be just
like lots 34 and 35, same basic treatment. The request from staff was to provide some
sort of information to council to demonstrate the common driveway mechanism would
work. There will be included on the face of the plat a note which will call out these
common driveways for the affected lots. Require that it will include an easement cross
easement for each of those owners who will ultimately acquire those lots and also
require that the driveways be maintained in common by the homeowners who take
access off those common lots. With that I will respond to any questions you might have.
Shari did ask me, I don't know when you want me to bring it up. She handed me a note
and suggested that I bring up the development agreement for number 7. That was also
submitted as part of the package as were the proposed restrictive covenants. I don't
know if Mr. Crookston has had an opportunity to review those. If he has perhaps we can
deal with those tonight so we don't have to put it on a subsequent agenda.
Crookston: I have reviewed those.
Morrow: You have submitted those? And you indicated you have reviewed those?
Crookston: Yes I have and so has Shari.
Morrow: Both the development agreement and CC&.R's?
Crookston: That is correct.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor I just have a question of the staff, has everything been answered to
your satisfaction's
Stiles: I believe so, we do have some modifications on the CC&R's and the
development agreement but we have reviewed those and approved them with those
changes.
Rountree: Same question to Gary about the final plat?
Smith: I believe that the letter that they submitted to us on the 17t" addresses the
review comments from the 16th . I haven't gone through each and every one of them but
that is our intention that they do meet those requirements. I don't see that they
requested any deviations from what we requested.
4
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 15
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, that being the case I would move that we approve the final plat for
the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 7 of 59 lots by Steiner Development subject to compliance
with all staff requirements.
Tolsma: second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the final plat for
the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 7 with all the staff comments, any further discussion? All
those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Do you wish to do the development agreement and the CC&R's at this time?
Marrow: well it is not on the agenda, I don't have a problem with that. Ms. Stiles and
Mr. Crookston have both indicated that they are acceptable to them with some minor
modifications. So I would move that we approve the development agreement and the
CC&R's for the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 7.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the
development agreement and also the CC&R's for the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 7 any
further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #17: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CINDI'S FLORAL
IN THE FRONT PORTION OF THE OLD ZAMZOWS STORE BY CINDI'S FLORAL —
611 E. 1ST STREET:
Corrie: Shari, was that Diane that we talked about earlier then she may not be here then
tonight.
Stiles: I talked to her today and she just started some physical therapy today due to her
stroke so I told her that there shouldn't be any problem with it being approved. She
testified at the Planning and Zoning Commission that she had no problem with the
findings and would comply with all of the conditions.
Corrie: Does Council have any questions of Shari? You have the findings of fact and
conclusions of law of the Planning and Zoning.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of
law as prepared for us by P & Z.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 16
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mir. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the Planning and Zoning, rail call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow — Yea, Bentley — Yea, Rountree — Yea, Tolsma — Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: A motion for the decision.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, 1 would move that the City council of the City of Meridian approves
the conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the
application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or
similar conditions as found justified and appropriate by the city council. That the
property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety
code, uniform fire code, parking requirements, paving and landscaping requirements
and all of the ordinances of the city of Meridian. The conditional use permit should be
subject to review by notice to the applicant by the city.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded on the decision as read, any further discussion? All
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, a point of editorial with respect to this. This is an Old Town and in
Old Town we do require conditional use permits because we are unable to Zone
accurately. But it seems to me that one of the directions that the Council might aught to
want to go in the near term is to have things like this clearly a floral shop in what is
historically a feed and seed and grain and agricultural enterprise is a compatible use. It
seems to me that we could do this with a hearing officer, cut the time frame down to the
applicant substantially, have the taxpayers interest well protected. It is kind of a no
brainer and not have it go through the process and consume valuable meeting time both
at the P & Z level and the city council level. I know one of the things that we were trying
to do as a Council in the not too distant past was to curtail as much as possible
conditional uses. So I think this is an excellent opportunity for an example of a project
that doesn't need to be done at the P & Z and council level and can be done at the
hearing officer level. I would like to see us press forward in that manner saving
everybody time and money.
ITEM #18: REQUEST FOR APRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR RAMA SUBDIVISION
BY 6 -II LLC —INTERSECTION OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND CENTRAL VALLEY DRIVE:
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 17
Carrie: Is there a representative from B--11 here this evening?
Fax: My name is Lanny Fox I am from Hubble Engineering. We have a letter of October
8 to answer the 12 points that were brought out in the P & z letter. You all have a copy
of that? With Mr. Krizenbeck's comments? l think we have answered all the questions
and we have agreed with about all of the 12 paints except ##8 which Mr. Krizenbeck has
a narrative there as an attachment concerning the number of parking spaces. I hope
that his explanation is adequate. Basically I have no other comments.
Carrie: Shari have you read the comments, do you have any comments on that, on item
##8?
Stiles: They state that they will comply or apply for a variance so that is fine.
Carrie: Council members, any questions?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, just a question for Gary and Shari both, have your questions
been addressed in the response of October 8th?.
Smith: Yes they have Councilman. Shari says yes also.
Corrie: Does anyone else have any questions or comments?
Rountree: gust a point I guess if a variance is in order can we act on the plat before the
variance is approved?
Morrow. We can approve the final plat and those types of things subject to staff
conditions and then (inaudible) because it is a conditions part of the requirements and
so on and so forth. That being the case I make a motion that we approve the
preliminary/final plat for Rama Subdivision by B-11 LLC subject to all staff conditions.
Tolsma: Second
Carrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the
preliminary/final plat of Rama subdivision by B-11 LLC subject to staff conditions, any
further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM ##19: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND CC&R=S FOR THE LAKE AT
CHERRY LANE No. 8 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT:
Corrie: You have those, Mr. Crookston, have you reviewed those?
Meridian City council
October 21, 1 997
Page 18
Crookston: Yes I have, subject to very minor changes they are fine.
Corrie: council any questions? 1 will entertain a motion on the development agreement
and CC&R's for the Lake at cherry Lane No. 8.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the development agreement and
CC&R's subject to the minor modifications as alluded by city Attorney Crookston for the
Lake at cherry Lane No. 6 by Steiner Development.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to approve the development agreement and
CC&R's for the Lake at cherry Lane No. 8 subject to the modifications alluded to by the
City Attorney, any further discussion?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have further discussion, I wish to amend my motion to include
authorization for the Mayor to sign and the clerk to attest.
Corrie: Does the Second approve?
Tolsma: Yes
Corrie: Amend the motion to approve the development agreement and CC&R's for the
Lake at cherry Lane No. 8 subject to modification by the attorney and the Mayor and
City to attest and sign, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #20: TULLY PARD IMPACT FEE OFFSET AGREEMENT:
Carrie: council any questions on the agreement?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, for the record could we have Gary Smith give us a brief run down of
what this is?
Smith.: Mr. Mayor and council members this is as I understand it is a purchase of the
right of way along Linder Road on the east side that would be adjacent to Tully Park.
This would be in conjunction with the development of the Linder Road as part of Tully
Park where we are planning to construct curb, gutter and sidewalk and widen the
pavement in that area adjacent to the park.
Morrow. As a point of further explanation what it does is it offsets the impact fee that we
would be required to pay. That being the case if there are no questions I would move
that we approve the Tully Park impact fee offset agreement, we authorize the Mayor to
sign and the city Clerk to attest.
Meridian City Council
October 21 , 1997
Page 19
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma (inaudible) that we approve
the Tully Park impact offset fee, any further discussion?
Morrow: In answer to your question Mr. Mayor, it subscribes with me personal
investment philosophy of buying high and selling low.
Rountree: It is a bit low
Corrie: All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: 3 Yea, 1 Nay
Morrow: why don't you argue your point here, why are you voting no just out of
curiosity?
Rountree: For one the value of the property is too low, $.19 a square foot. And in
principle because by approving this we buy into taxing ourselves.
Morrow well why didn't you make that argument before, I kind of like it. I think the
motion sucks now.
FIVE MINUTE BREAK
ITEM #21: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
Corrie: Gary Smith
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council, I would first like to ask. I received a couple of comments
back on that draft letter to the ACHD concerning the trust fund payment request for
"Tully Park Bridge". I was just curious if that is alright with all the Councilmen, Mayor
Corrie responded to me and Councilman Bentley said it looked fine and Charlie had no
problem.
Morrow. I reviewed the letter also and I think that we respond back with no trust fund
monies. I think the points are well made with respect to whether it ever becomes a road
or a through road at all. So again it goes along with the thinking that we ought not be
depositing taxpayer money in a trust fund account that has no long term goal.
Smith: I will then finalize it and circulate it for all of your signatures as written. Two
items that I have for your consideration tonight, the first is the bid results on the waste
water treatment plant administration building. I think you have in your possession a copy
of Brad Watson's memorandum outlining the bidders that submitted. The low bid was
C
Meridian city Council
October 21, 1997
Page 20
presented by Connolly construction $288,000, the second low was JS Construction
$288,500, third low was Scott Hedrick $290,x]40. There were ten bidders total. Brad
has done research on qualifications for Connolly and he has checked with Boise
Independent school District and Boise City Public works department. Also our Building
Inspector commented that the project manager and superintendent is a competent
person and able to do this kind of work. So, I guess our recommendation to you would
be to award the bid to Connolly Construction in the amount of $288,000.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I am prepared to offer a motion to award the bid to Connolly
Construction in the amount of $288,000, authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk
to attest the executed contract between the city of Meridian and Connolly construction
in that amount.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to award the bid to Connolly Construction for the
amount of $288,000, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow. 1 would like to offer a comment on our staff and Gary's group. That bidding with
respect to a project that high to have $800 separation between the first three and four
bidders indicates that they did a heck of a fine job in preparing the bid documents and
the planning that went on. The private sector contractors reacted in the closeness of
their bids on a project that large between the first four bids is a real compliment to a job
well done by our people. So Gary make sure you pass that on and on behalf of the rest
of the council and Mayor recognize staff's efforts please.
Smith: Thank you I will, I appreciate the comments, I will also pass that along to Thurber
and Associates who are the architects on the project. I am sure they are very
appreciative of that. Thank you, the second item I have before you this evening is a
contract change order for some additional work that was done or is proposed to be done
at the Ashford Greens lift station. we replaced a length of sewer line in Black cat Road
primarily pending, it was based on the pending development of Turnberry Subdivision. It
was an 8 inch line and it was going to be necessary for Turnberry to build a 12 inch line
to service their subdivision. So this length of 8 inch line that was installed by Ashford
Greens Developers was replaced in Black Cat Road along with the relocation of a
manhole and the small change in some chain link fencing around the lift station site
itself. This was 16 foot deep sewer line and it was very difficult, it is a very difficult
digging project because of the ground water and the gravels. The excavation of the
pipe is necessary because of the opening of the lift station site itself, the excavation of
the lift station site itself.
Carrie: So they are taking out the 8 and replacing it with a 12.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 21
Smith: Correct.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to
attest to an increase of the contract amount of $15,189 which would bring the total
contract price with this change order to $326,899.47 to Sommers Construction Inc.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded, any further discussion on the motion? All those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Smith: Thank you Mayor and Council that is all I have, unless you have any questions of
me while I am here on any other projects going on or not going on.
Corrie: Shari?
Stiles: Nothing
Corrie: Chief?
Gordon: Mr. Mayor and Council I passed out at the starting of the meeting a list of
purchase orders that should be on last year's budget. I neglected to get those in In time
and I would like a budget adjustment to take care of those. The list the fuel is June, July
and August of last year for Ada Transport. The Chevron bill was last month's we quit
using the City tanks down here so everything was on the Chevron bill. Territorial Supply
was tape recorders for the officers, this was a result of the incident in Boise. I talked to
Councilman Bentley and we agreed that it would be to our best interest to furnish those
for the officers. Northwest Property Management is the lease for the building on Fine
that was for last month. The Department of Law Enforcement bill was for a 93 Ford
Taurus which I picked up for myself approximately two months ago. My car hit 1007000
this one has 84,000 on it. They agreed to hold off to the end of the budget year to see if
there was money left in my capital outlay budget and there was. So I would like that one
included in last month's or last year's budget. Totaling $19,959.18. Any questions?
Rountree: The only question I have is payment of June, July and August fuel bills. It
seems as we are a bit in the rears on those.
Gordon: Yes we were
Rountree: I understand things like that happen.
Gordon: Yes sir no excuse.
Meridian City council
October 21, 1 997
Page 22
Morrow. Question Bill with respect to do you have the monies in your budget to cover
these things?
Gordon: Yes l do, there was no excuse for them not being turned in on time.
Morrow: I agree
Gordon: They just didn't get done.
Morrow. I think that we currently are stili reconciling and paying on 1998-97's budget.
So essentially I think all we have to do is instruct the Treasurer's office to incorporate
these to close out 1996-97. 1 don't believe that it will take a budget adjustment motion.
Rountree: They are budgeted items.
Gordon: What concerned me was at the department head meeting the City Treasurer
said that as of that date everything was over. Then we did get the final print outs so
was a little concerned.
Morrow: Well she is following our instructions in terms of trying to get the stuff done and
taken care of. The issue is that here we have a late presentation of billings that should
be in the 1996-97 budget so we can instruct her to incorporate those.
Gordon: That is all I have, I stand corrected there was one more issue. The Department
of Larry Enforcement has eliminated the Alcohol Beverage Control enforcement and
have turned that back over to local agencies. So effective next month we are going to
be responsible for all enforcement on liquor licenses which includes the bars in town.
Rountree: What does that entail?
Gordon: A lot of work, premise inspections, all enforcement of liquor laws, selling to
minors, pay on the poker machines just a multitude of things which they had one officer
in fact they had three officers in the Boise office that were handling the three counties
and they were on the road all the time. I would say it is probably going to increase the
workload by at least half an officer.
Corrie: (Inaudible)
Gordon: lies sir that is why I brought it up, I am going to start bringing ordinances, city
ordinances to handle the work that we are going to have to do on the liquor
establishments.
Rountree: With this crafty maneuvering of the State did they send any money with it'd
Gordon: No sir, unfunded mandate.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1 997
Page 23
Bentley: Chief, Mr. Mayor, at the APA meeting yesterday 1 had Claire Bowman come up
and talk to us about the commuter train, regio -sprinter. Several comments were made
one was that the Meridian station was the best manned, the best looking of the entire
valley. So I think our staff and the people that volunteered and helped out with that. Also
the engineers, the people with Amtrak, the rail road people and the regio sprinter people
stated that the Meridian officers have done the finest job to date of guarding these
crossings. That is has been the best run in the entire year and a half of bringing this
train around to the different cities both here and in Canada. So I think our officers
deserve a real pat on the back.
Morrow. If I can add to that let's make sure that we make our committee that is handling
all of this aware of all of these same compliments and get something to them
(inaudible).
Bentley: I mentioned that to the Mayor also at that meeting what the comments were
passed onto me and they were passed onto him later that we need to do something for
the committee for much time and effort as they have been putting in.
Corrie: I will be making some recommendations to Council here in about another three
weeks. Everyone that is associated with this program will receive a letter from the City
thanking them.
Morrow. I think let's do a little plague too.
Corrie: Do you want a plague to all 175 of them?
Morrow: No, the key folks is kind of what I have in mind in terms of some sort of plague
and then a letter can go to each individual.
Corrie: Counselor?
Crookston: Yes, the new City Attorney that I introduced to you last meeting Wendy
Dvorak has accepted a new job for higher pay. She is able to work at home so she is
with her child who I think is not more than 13 months old. So I am in the process of
seeking another Assistant City Attorney.
Morrow. So we have her for one week?
Crookston: Two weeks, actually we have her until October 31st, she will leave as soon
as I get another one. But not later than October 31't. In your papers you have the, I
mentioned this before, purchase of computers and printers and other things so that you
already approved a budget adjustment for that. But that is what l am purchasing in that
regard.
E
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 24
Corrie: I will say that the one and only brief that I saw that she did was an excellent job.
It was a well prepared brief. Mr. Morrow?
Morrow. A couple of things, one is the agenda for our strategic planning meeting on the
28th, we will be talking about the five ordinances we talked about earlier this evening,
g
the Building and P & Z, the commissions, Boards, and committees, Traffic Safety,
Ethics, the irrigation ditch fine tune that Shari and Gary are going to do, the tree
ordinance, the light duty ordinance. discuss those things. I don't think that we need to
have a presentation from Bob Haley he was with us last month and didn't have a lot to
offer. Brought us up to speed with where he was at with property negotiations and so on
and so forth. So I don't think it would be necessary for us to invite him. Should be the
final session to fine tune all of these sessions that we are done with now in terms of the
ordinances so we can move forward with those and adopt them at our next meeting.
Anything else that you guys can think of that you wish to see on that agenda? Next
item is that I think all of you are aware that I have been working on a project with Herald
Cox to commemorate a little bit of history of the city of Meridian on a little piece of
property next to city Hall. The design for that is completed, the bids are completed, the
approval and the go ahead have been given by Mr. cox. So we will be pressing forward
with construction of that in the not very distant future. Then 1 W11 make available to you a
copy of the plan for that structure. The next thing is I have a hand out here in terms of
questions that have been asked and topics that have came up with respect to where we
are at with sewer and water issues and enterprise funds and so on and so forth. I have
had prepared a schedule of construction to move our plant as you are all aware we
have been really working hard to get our capacity up. This gives you a schedule
between this year and the improvements that we are starting this coming fiscal year and
the year 2006. That will complete the doubling of the capacity of the plant from 2.8 to
4.4 to a little over 8 million gallons. The cost of that is $11,475,600. This summary that
you guys are seeing before you does not include the cost of normal maintenance,
additions and that type of thing. Plus any cost that may come along with mandates from
DEQ or EPA current status of our enterprise funds are some $5 to $6 million. I have told
you before and indicated in last year's budget hearings is that none of those monies
would be available to lend ourselves for other things that might come up that we as a
City might want to do. This will give you a layout showing you that between now and
006 we have to come up with another $5 to $6 million worth of enterprise funds just to
be able to fund what it is we are doing. The commitments we have made with respect to
the property in the NE corner in our impact zone and the development that will occur
there gives us no room for any daylight over the next 8 to 10 years. We pretty much
have to as a city this council and future council's have to be very disciplined in sticking
to this particular schedule of these equipments and those monies. So it is, this was
structured for benefit today and for future benefit. We are on a real narrow tight path in
order to be able to make everything work that we have committed ourselves to and it is
not here in black and white. I would welcome your comments at the planning session on
the 28th and any questions that you may have as to haw we have structured the future
expansion of the sewer and the water systems in terms of the requirements we have to
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1 997
Page 25
do and have to meet. And the final question is primarily for Charlie, how we are coming
in terms of hiring a Parks Superintendent? I haven't seen that add (inaudible)
- Rountree: I will tell you all about that when it is my turn
Corrie: Do you have any update on the Generations?
Morrow: Generations yes, as you know the final design and engineering for
Generations came back to be heavy commercial construction design. It is outside the
capabilities of volunteers and light commercial and residential contractors to work on
and bid. I requested Brad and talked with your Mr. Mayor, they have the approval to
have Brad get courtesy estimates from two general contractors and to pay for them.
That pricing that came from the Ewing co. indicated that project without electrical
without plumbing was $75,000 that did include a $22,000 allowance for purchase and
installation of pavers. When you back that off from the $53,000 by the time you factor in
the generic numbers for plumbing and electrical puts you back to $75,000. The value of
the project in terms of as it is designed the it will cast us out of pocket approximately
$75,090. That is predicated upon the facts that the Girl Scouts then would sell all
$22,000 worth of pavers and the installation would be done by volunteers. That clearly
in the design of this particular project is the only thing that the volunteers could aid in.
So the decision that the council will need to make is that do we go forward with
Generations in the design that it currently has. We also need to come to grips with the
fact that we budgeted $75,000 for Generations. We show revenue for $75,000 it was
predicated that most of this revenue (inaudible) and volunteer labor. So the question is
where do we come with the hard cash if we stick with these design in terms of $75,000
give or take. So those are the decisions that we as a council need (End of Tape) to
determine where we have the monies to be able to afford to pay the type of folk that it
takes to get it done. We would also have to develop a good strong set of plans and
specs because it is clearly above the $25,000 bid limit it would have to go to
competitive bidding as required by state statute. So we have some decisions that we
have to make there.
Rountree: Considerable debate about that particular issue last evening at the Parks and
Recreation commission meeting. I don't know that there was necessarily a consensus
but I think a lot of people felt that yes we probably ought to look at value engineering but
I think legitimately scale back the design and see what we can afford. No matter what
we come up with in a design the question is where do we find hard cash to pay for it
above and beyond donations and receipts for paver sales are. The possibility of
eliminating some of the pillars and beams and possibly scaling back some of the other
amenities in the plaza. But possibly coming to some grips with what we feel the value
ought to be. And then maybe going to either back to Briggs or someone else and say
here is the budget what can we do for that. Backed into this thing basically had no
constraints on the plaza to begin with. Now we need to back it into reality in my opinion.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 26
Morrow: and do you have a suggestion about as to how we go about that. Because it
looks to me like by the time you put together with the donated thing with respect to
fountain and so on and so forth I think the reality the last numbers I heard in terms of
pavers sold were somewhere between 300 and 500 that is a long ways away from
$22,000 worth. So the reality seems to me that the real cash number at this juncture is
somewhere between $75,000 and $90,000 and then add on the other donated items.
The project begins to get, and I don't know what that value is because I don't know what
the value of the donated items is.
Rountree: I think we could probably run those numbers but it is somewhere between
$30,000 in terms of donated paver sales, is that close Will? The last time I gat the
numbers on the pavers it was close to that.
Morrow: So is it fair to say the value of this project is somewhere between $120,000 and
$130,000 or more or less?
Rountree: I think if you take the project as it sits novo you look at what has been
donated, what the costs are in terms of property and everything (inaudible) The value of
the project is probably somewhere around $100,000 to $120,000. But is that, can we
make up the difference with what is left to do. I don't see how we can do that given the
budget.
Morrow. I think what you are talking about we are looking at in terms of hard cash and
reality is (inaudible)
Corrie: Has anyone talked to Hanson the contract architect about changes that could be
made?
Morrow: The last time we talked was in your office when we did the conference call. The
issue was that he was reluctant to make any changes. So our instructions to Dean
Briggs were to engineer for the changes that the three or four of us discussed. In the
course of his doing that he had conversations with the architect who again expressed a
desire not to change anything. What we got back in terms of plans was engineering
based on the design and that he the architect originally had and as you recall he had
not provided for any engineering. So what Mr. Briggs did was provide the construction
engineering for the plans as designed based on the feedback from Mr. Hanson. So what
we have now are a set of plans that are fully constructed and ready and engineered, we
just have a problem with the (inaudible)
Rountree: No I have no solution, I don't have a money tree in the backyard. Other than
possibly, the only thing that I can even recommend is that we take a hard look at what is
proposed and scale it back and then see if there are enough monies to back that up
(inaudible) what has been donated.
Meridian city council
October 21, 1997
Page 27
Morrow. Well the point of this discussion then is what we need to do is determine what
we have approximately for hard monies to have a goal that we need to go to and then
take the Parks and Recreation Commission and sit down with them and say here is
reality where do we want to go.
Rountree: I think from the commission standpoint I am not going to speak for all of them
but their desire was to get it done and get it done now. But they all understand the
budgetary problems. I think we need to request Will if you can with Janice get a
tabulation as of the end of the year on donations so we know what we have in terms of
hard cash to back up that side of the ledger where we budgeted $75,000 and start
working from that point forward to see what it is we can afford.
Corrie: I still think it would behoove us to talk to Dave Hansen again. There could be
something done here that he knows what we have. If he is still willing to work within
what we have and not make that so grandeur what he had it might work. I don't know,
we are going to have to have some architectural designs anyway. So we might as well
approach him and see if he wants to continue to do what he was doing only on a
different scale and basis and then go from there and touch all of the bases.
Rountree: Going back to David is fine but he really didn't provide us anything other than
concept and that is the part of the situation where now we have to then take time and
energies to find an engineer and design the thing so it can be built. Dave might have
some suggestions on how to scale it back but we are still going to have to go to an
engineering firm and get plans put together in order for them to be cost estimated and in
fact we can see it in our budget to advance it put it out for bid. Dave's deal was not to
provide any engineering, all he did was a nice architectural drawings and the model. He
didn't provide us anything that we could build anything with. He was real clear about
that when we talked to him that he was not providing that to us, it was the concept that
he was providing us.
Corrie: Well I think we better, we want to look at this thing so we can either go forward
and what do we have because I don't want to see that piece of ground just sitting there
anymore. I don't think anybody does. Under the circumstances we need to press
forward on this as Mr. M crow says and let's see if we can't get something g g oin here. I
think personally I am going to call Dave. I think there is a misunderstanding somewhere
here. I think it is probably on his part, I don't know I may be nave here, but I would like
to have him give me a chance to tell me what he is thinking here.
Rountree: I don't have any problem with that
Corrie: If he is then we need to make it perfectly clear what we have to work with and go
from there. If we have to get somebody else to do the architectural work. Anything
further?
Meridian City Council
October 21 , 1997
Page 28
Rountree: I guess to finish that up maybe this is an item for our workshop planning
session. We can have the numbers (inaudible) keep it on the surface.
Corrie: Glenn?
Bentley: Yes, at the last budget session we had the planning session for the budgets
we discussed the fact of doing a budget adjustment to the capital funds for the police for
the purchase of the four cars of $80,000. The time has come to make that move, it Is
next month the chief has to order these cars. So we need to do a budget adjustment
for the $80,000.
Morrow: I don't have any problem with that, it should be, it aught to be included with the
other four or five items that we took care of earlier.
Bentley: That money has to come out of this years or out of the
Rountree: (Inaudible)
Bentley: What we needed to do, we were going to take the surplus money that was
going back into the general fund and roll out $80,000 of that to carry over from last year
back into his budget so he can purchase the cars on 98.
Morrow. You can still do that because (inaudible)
Bentley: So you just want to add it on to that?
Berg: I think it is best to approve the purchase of that then when we have to amend the
budget then what we amend is his purchase of the vehicles and shall we say fund
balance from the previous year, do you understand what I am saying. But it should be a
line item and maybe needs to be added as line item for now but you should approve
that and then we will make the adjustment I guess you would say when we amend the
budget,
Bentley: So what is the wording we need.
Berg: I would just say approve the purchase of that.
Bentley: Okay, I would make a motion that we approve the purchase of the four police
cars for a total of $80,000.
Morrow: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to amendment of approximately $80,000 on the
96/97 budget for police cars, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1 997
Page 29
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Bentley: I have a few things for the Executive session. Mr. Mayor did you have an
adjustment you needed for yours?
Corrie: That was for this year.
Bentley: That is all I had for right now.
Carrie: Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: In response to your question Walt we have advertised for Parks and
Recreation Director, we received some 31 applicants, we screened them to four, we
have sent letters to those four individuals congratulating them on entering our interview
process. They have been sent five questions to respond to. We will evaluate those five
questions and invite those four individuals to interview with the City of Meridian
sometime the end of November, first part of December. So we are in the process of
screening folks and interviewing folks. I have that information on those individuals if you
would like to see it. All very well qualified we feel. I have a letter and I admit I have had
it for quite some time but I wanted to bounce it off the Bureau of Reclamation. what it is
is a letter asking them in essence to give us the right of way on their property or their
ownership of the property on Five Mile Drain. which the proposed bike path connector
between Meridian and Linder will fit. The Bureau is very eager to receive this letter,
they very much want to work with us to do this in this situation. They may very well want
to work something out with the City on all of their rights of way within our impact area. I
don't know what all we would be getting into but that will be on the down side t❑ get too
much and too much liability in terms of maintenance. But at least for this one particular
project that is one of the elements that is slowing it down is being able to certify that we
have the right of way. I offer it as a suggestion to go to the Bureau under the Mayor's
signature and we get on with this request and see what they come back to us with. They
have indicated that Nampa Meridian is not going to take this very kindly. Nampa
Meridian works for them and they feel (inaudible) put us in a better position. So you are
right, I am suggesting that we don't (inaudible)
Morrow. I think it is a good concept, I am totally supportive of that. Let's get it done and
we can have the Mayor and the four councilmen sign it to give it some horsepower if
you wish Mr. Rountree.
Rountree: I think that is our pleasure, I don't know that it necessarily needs our
signatures but that would be fine with me (inaudible). I move that the City of Meridian
prepare a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation as outlined in the handout and that it be
signed by the Mayor and the four City Councilmen.
Morrow. Second
Meridian City Council
October 21 , 1997
Page 30
Corrie: Motion made and seconded, discussion. Do you want the senators and the
representatives
Rountree: I really don't think that is necessary.
Corrie: You heard the motion, all those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Rountree: We have talked and several times on the annexation of the sewer plant and
the park. I have done a little talking with the Ada County Commissioners and some
planners in the planning community and have been in the planning community in Idaho
for a number of years and were actually behind the drafting of the land use act. None of
them seem to be able to raise an objection or an issue if we were to advance the
annexation of those two properties for municipal purposes. I guess I would like us to
quit talking about it and direct staff to put together a description of the property and
advance our own annexation for those two parcels.
Morrow. I think if I might add to that my feeling in our last meeting was that was our
instructions to our staff to press forward. I think what you are saying just further
validates our position of wanting to press forward. So let's get it done, I think we left that
lay a little bit for Shari to have the conversation with the one property owner.
Rountree: We did
Morrow: That she was talking about over the new park site, if I might ask Mr. Mayor did
she have that conversation?
Corrie: I don't know, Shari do you want to answer that question, I have a question.
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council I have talked to one property owner that is in between
the park and the existing City limits. They are still discussing it, it is kind of a hard sell.
They would be interested in being able to hook up to City water of course one of their
problems now is sewer with the drain field that they have. I told them we couldn't help
them out with that at this time. They also have additional issues, they are zoned RT they
have split off their house which makes it slightly less an acre and the remainder they
have is approximately well slightly less than 5 acres. That would be one selling point for
them that if they got in the City they could have legal lots that they could get buildings
permits. They have not made a decision, the property is up for sale right now. They are
wanting to talk with some people to see what impacts that will have on the sale of their
land. 1 don't have a decision from them yet.
Corrie: I think I will delay, I am not, you talked to the County Commissioners?
4
Meridian City Council
October 21 , 1997
Page 31
Rountree: I talked to Roger and bounced it off of him (inaudible) and he saw no merit in
the County having to spend time reviewing development plans permitting construction
on City property. He didn't think that was a wise use of their time or ours. He didn't
seem to have a problem with (inaudible).
Corrie: I agree
Rountree: And it was bounced off of Vern previously and he didn't seem to have a big
problem with it. Now I can't say (inaudible) I can't see anything that they would have to
take us to task on. It is our property and we are willing. It is adjacent to the City
(inaudible) impact area.
Corrie: We don't have a strip annexation here.
Rountree: My contention is that it is adjacent to our City limits, you can either one of
those sites you can (inaudible) strip but I guess that is for somebody and the courts to
be decide. I don't think it would be challenged. I think it is at least to our benefit to try. If
the numbers are right initially we are looking at $20,000 but ultimately we have $11.5
million worth of projects proposed at the sewer plants. The fees on that in the way of
building permits is a sizable chunk of money. The sooner we do it the better off we are.
Morrow: And in the case of (inaudible) the distance between the current edge of the city
limits and the sewer plant is essentially slightly less than 400 lineal feet. We have the
power to annex the entire roadway right of way as it exists today in order to get there.
think conventionally the thing about strip annexations is when you are going a long
distance such as in the case if I remember right it was Chubbuck went a substantial
distance to capture an unwilling property owner and bring them in the City for the
purpose of revenues. The court found that was not justifiable and that it was an
annexation. Here it is us annexing us and the distance is a short distance. I don't know
what the exact lineal footage is on the park site from our city limits but it is not far, 1/4
mile. so I guess (inaudible) council is favorable to do this then we instruct the staff to
prepare the annexation ordinances.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would agree, this isn't impacting anybody but ourselves. It brings
up the other point that I brought up earlier of one government entity taxing another.
There is no need for that so I think we should proceed.
Corrie: I guess that leaves you Mr. Tolsma (inaudible) I would entertain a motion to that
effect if you so desire.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I would move that we instruct the City Attorney and the City staff to
prepare and annexation ordinance to annex the sewer site and to annex the park site at
the NW corner of Meridian and Ustick.
Rountree: Second
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 32
Bentley: Discussion
Corrie: Motion made and seconded, discussion?
Bentley: separate ordinances?
Morrow. Yes
Carrie: Any further discussion, any comments here?
Stiles: Do we have to go through public hearings on those annexations?
Crookston: Yes we do
(Inaudible)
Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All yea
Rountree: The last thing I have is at some point in time we need to have a meeting with
P & Z and talk about direction, our expectations, their expectations. To get an
opportunity to at least talk to a couple of them before they leave. They have come and
gone quickly enough that I have not met at least one of them.
Corrie: I was trying to see if we could get it the 12th of November that is right after
Veterans Day but I understand they are going to have their meeting that night. we
might have a luncheon meeting with them. I think it is very important that we do this.
Bentley: Speaking of that Shari you were asking me the other day isn't it time for us to
meet again.
(Inaudible)
Rountree: We had a session with there on the couplet, but we didn't have a session with
them.
Corrie: So we should have one with them in November. I will try to see if I can set up, if
that meets with everybody's approval the 12th at lunch.
(Inaudible)
Tolsma: I have nothing
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 33
Corrie: Two things before we go into Executive Session, one is from Will Berg city Clerk
is approval of election judges and clerks. These are the ones to ask for your approval
on the first precinct is June Pack as a judge, Annalee Luke, Patricia Roberts and
William G. Berg, Sr. Precinct No. 2 Lawana Niemann, is judge, Rosemary Law, Debbie
Warwick and Eloise Stemple as clerks. Precinct No. 3, Linda Berg as judge, Michael
Ganes, Holly Farris, Laurie Swanbeck, Marion Boston, Sheri Baker, Nikki Tomkins as
clerks and alternate Renee Feller.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the list of clerks and judges for the
upcoming election in November.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and second to approve the list of clerks and judges for the
upcoming election, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Then did you all have the letter from Janice Smith in reference to the IRS audit,
we went ahead and paid the $375.72 and I gat word back that we will not be charged
the interest on that as well. So Mr. White of the IRS approved that.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, on that point I think it is appropriate that the Council move and
authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement with the IRS and verify by Council motion
that we are in agreement with that settlement. So I am prepared to offer a motion that
authorize the Mayor to sign and the clerk to attest the agreement between the city of
Meridian and the IRS.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow. My second paint that I wish to make on that is that in this great State we had
four cities that helped and supported us. It seems to me to be appropriate that we send
a letter to Challis, Rexburg, Idaho Falls, Sugar city thanking them for their help and
contribution and that the Mayor and all four Council sign that and recognize their efforts
on our behalf.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we have letters sent to the four cities challis,
Rexburg, Idaho Falls, Sugar city to thank them for their contributions, any further
discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1997
Page 34
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Berg: Just a comment those four cities will get a copy of our information and results that
we promised therm as per the agreement for them donating to the cause.
Corrie: Also I would like Council's permission to add Eagle to that because they did
have part of this. It wasn't stated here but (inaudible). Anything else?
Bentley: I do have one other thing, I read something in the paper and of course I don't
hold the paper totally correct on some things. But they stated in there that the Parks
and Recreation commission had put together a committee to pursue the donations of
park land?
Rountree: Correct, Parks and Recreation Commission has a subcommittee for
donations and acquisition to look into that.
Bentley: My question is I don't believe through the ordinances that the Parks and
Recreation commission has the authority to create another committee.
Rountree: I believe by the by-laws we are allowed to create the appropriate committees
to serve as experts if you will in various areas. If you want that point clarified we can
certainly look into it.
Bentley: I think it needs to be clarified and I don't think the by-laws have been passed
yet have they?
Crookston: l am not sure whether or not, the by-laws now that is done by the
Commission.
Rountree: The by-laws were created by the commission, you have a copy of the by-
laws.
Bentley: Were the by-laws supposed to came back for the council to review and
approve?
Rountree: I don't believe that is the way it is set up in the ordinance.
Crookston: I don't believe so, I think the by-laws are done by the Commission itself.
Rountree: I believe the ordinance establishing the commission indicated that is one of
the things the Parks and Recreation Commission was to do was to create by-laws. It
says nothing about where it goes from there. The by-laws have been out for comment if
you will for months.
Meridian City Council
October 21, 1 997
Page 35
Bentley: I have had them I wasn't aware we weren't supposed to vote on those.
Rountree: I think it is a legitimate question and I think we need to sit down and talk
about that.
Morrow. I think may I suggest that what we do between now and Tuesday next is re-
read the ordinance that created the Parks and Recreation Commission so that we
answer the question and then we can have a short discussion at that meeting.
Rountree: And if it needs to be modified we can modify it.
Corrie: Anything further before we entertain a motion to go into Executive session for
personnel discussion? Entertain a motion for executive session.
Bentley: So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we have Executive Session, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Corrie: We return from the Executive session with discussions on personnel. No
decisions were made at that point. We do have one transfer that we need to do on
transfer of $5909 capital outlay to staff in the Mayor's office.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would make a motion than we authorize the transfer of $5999 from
the Capital improvement fund transfer to staff.
Rountree: second
Corrie: Motion made and second, any further discussion? All those in favor? opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: I will entertain a motion to adjourn.
Morrow: so moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and second, all those in favor? Opposed?
Meridian City council
October 21, 1997
Page 36
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:50 P.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
pX9161•• i'
ATTEST:
sx� cr, MF4V life
CW4
WILLIAM O. BERG, JR., CWY D ERK w
SEAL
oe 7 -ISI,
Ott, ' ���
ROLL CALL:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1997 — 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Z WALT MORROW CHARLIE ROUNTREE
GLENN BENTLEY RON TOLSMA
MAYOR ROBERT CORRIE
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD OCTOBER 7,1997: 0"rove-__
MARCH FOR PARKS CHECK PRESENTATION -- i9iz--
1. TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION:
2. TABLED OCTOBER 711997: ORDINANCE #760 —COMMISSIONS, BOARDS,
COMMITTEES:�G� �-7 /�vjle 3 -Ell `w�l
3. TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 —TRAFFIC SAFETY
COMMISSION: ��, 6e,� /(lev, 5y..,x- fi.,�,
4. TABLED OCTOBER 711997: ORDINANCE #775 —VACATION OF GENTRY
WAY: / �zl Ala V, .�� A 141
_5. _ _TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997: ORDINANCE #776 .— BUILDING &PLANNING
AND ZONING DEPARTMENT: 74ez- !� 511� 197-1
6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBQIVISION BY WESTPARFGICO.:
a,or✓v-o v.e,� -//f � c-1 & 4�,d�ornv:e_ 0
7. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR LUMBERMAN'S BUILDING CENTER - 415 E. BROADWAY:
Gi�,p ro V� Q �+..� GGe cC
S. FIN INGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR AN OFF PREMISE SIGN BY WILLIAM T. RITTER, DDS - 317
W. CHERRY LANE: a,1,-2pYov,,p �'�� v4j cI& alplarov-P deelri�
9. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE
REQUEST FOR TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION BY BENCHMARK LAND CO.:
10. ORDINANCE #?77 — TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION: a, prov�
11. TABLED OCTOBER 7, 1997:. PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR TURNBERRY
SUBDIVISION BY BENCHMARK LAND CO.: �c. 6,1-e-, 1(lov, ��7/14-{�-,
12. ORDINANCE #778 —LEE CENTERS REZONE: G��p rO V'e.�
13. ORDINANCE #779 —TREE ORDINANCE: -�hl-e A, -b? fid- 5a AA�---
14. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 7,1997: REQUEST FOR A
VARIANCE TO THE REQUIREMENT TO TILE THE SAFFORD LATERAL BY
GOLFVIEW ASSOCIATE UMIED PARTNERSHIP:
15. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 7, 1997: REQUEST FOR
A CHILD CARE/PRESCHOOL FOR 8 TO 10 CHILDREN BY NIA LOFZ'ON —
2261 E. KATELYN:
16. FINAL PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 77 59 LOTS BY STEINER
DEVELOPMENT:
17. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CiNDPS FLORAL IN
THE FRONT PORTION OF THE OLD Z4MZOWS STORE BY CiNDI'S FLORAL
— •.:11 E. 1ST STREET:
0py�1,o ✓e �"/�' � c le,
�`o�ry✓e Gee��..��`a..�
18. REQUEST FOR APRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR RAMA SUBDIVISION BY
B-71 LLC —INTERSECTION OF MERIDIAN ROAD AND CENTRAL VALLEY
DRIVE: c�frov-e
19. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND CC&R'S FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY
LANE NO.6 BY STElNER DEVELOPMENT: cvfro vR-
20. TULLY PARK IMPACT FEE OFFSET AGREEMENT: ol9prove 3--1
27. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER:
1. BID RESULTS FOR WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING:
2. CHANGE ORDER: ASHFORD GREENS LIFT STATION —SEINER
SEWER LINE REPLACEMENT:
22. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
C Y OF MEREDIAN RECEIVED
PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET OCT 2111997
CM OF MERMN
NAME - -PHQNE MIMBER
i
' ` .r _ rL. �.� r�^t� .- •�
.
l.a-
00
r
00
` V
LO
LO
C
C
�}
3
t•- fr•}!i•s
r
i
l
r
1
4
0
CD
C) !
OD
C !
C_j
i
r
W
' F
Cl
,r
H
P-4 W
L
LO
C\i
H H
•,•[
>
H
r.•
WW
ti
H
z
• f=
o
�.
. '
Q �
Q3
'
o
t
•-.
LLJ
00
C
' S r
<
r /
Q
{.�.•
o
r, tii'
Z
44
F
Y � , c •
� ..f :I a.
ter:^:. ,*.-- "�._•�
+�X4
1�1
..rY. .r n
f'-_ .� �-.. -�..
r r - .....{--.r••►^.-.T'r�
.fir F.. �•y' �+yli .. •,t ri` , 1 �` '_3- .. ••f '. t,`t •�:• j..`r '.T rl.• •1.� .i;1 Y a. y r V • 'y' S
��` -:►' .. i ,{ '�: tri ;1 - t a - j .. '.1 _ r ' .[ '� �: r .� r .. _ _ �, � - ♦ �! .�
- -. �. `•'. .ar' t- _ � s'ti r" .� __ �}, - aJr„ .� ,t.L-{ •� •ti:= a �� i{,.:,• 1 `t .."r. i'.. 7i. �. _ r { 1. _-n,_ _f' -
J -f L r�• 41: tt - �. ry �.{ ++ ry '�`Z` ] I._. �' i1 v.-T,`•'�r.C'r'{r 11 .�,s L1 �, ) •.e •' Y�Y .4. .. :_!
�� .i. a �1 jar ��r: :."l i� 1• - 'rl`•i it 'Ry •/ '•1.' '\ t •1. 'i+ 3 ^.ti +{• :■ 'Y• 'i �� :ri•
. �' :t w. � l.{ +a .ti -'!71 _ � i -r -•1 - � �j. Y,r •.`• � 'r' L Y. . e'' 1;i� �r- •�/�-`.�r'..'�•'� _ v% .. r
l•. t = r i : �. + feF fti .. ►Y� .t: st, . . } i ; r i• i:. r l 'r +:ti
r ... ,tY S' L."i�.y �•r .4;�r + �� .,rl - t�� r-• .��r �t "�� � �• r -�E ..} . Y • .z•'r.ti ti �� t r [ •i 1 4•.."�• :.� �.• i. .� sr 'f• ti' � 1.'r'1'• r :� - - .��
` ..7� -r ...� �1 _� �� .,r7�. j{. k.� i� *. .��• .- � I y �4 �r ,.�" .;� `�' i t � ti �.v!+'.. �t:1'( . { �a ' .r � G f�•+r�4•.'J. :; �-� ! �-': i .��.• li � �i. .�it� r�•-. . ■y�_. �L ��`•.• :a)_ -1-.:. _ _ i F!
y i ` r 1 f Y ! i { + r wF }► i• i ;S• x ': •�+ i. f'• j_: r C�• ~4`• {�. :� L r� { - J. lt.+ r.S. al- r�' M1�� r1w
} -
�1 '="��;.A.:[-. y4I- r� �4i x it��}• •• . 4a � t2'�S' �f� y't}Yc�y: l�rir.'`'R�t�4�f1.rti'rF�ti}•'`I`�.; •�"r.�ti;.r� ;• f '�a. •ly��ij"S1:►'li:.�� :�r�'Fy��ri. r�.fi[a �.r �r.yµ1 �}L-•r..1T�r.. f . �1trr—�C. .s. LC`i{'14.,� r.j'•�i.,.�;:e.'�=' .� jF{...T�t•'L fi.'ttf. rL'i' . �;�.�..�fYr•►-i''� �+��-��.fs1�`t'{�•�H! �. •3+•4y..��:'4q•• t�•`:.YrY',p,y-,'�ti''.,.tir.•,.[..,:!,.:,y►":�l.,.a.,r�Fr 7+''a':I��,F•��.ti."�.f•, ,��':r, ..'�'�': A j'r.�'ti.*�.i,KL';+t''-i'a,♦.:Ia,'la-4ytl.••y^- �L'f,.�� Tt :i,v ��'- 1t7�-�{+�'.. ''C1�-r•�t}N'?fry�ti1rTir1'C?;,x�,vt , �,r^i}-;^�'•_LI]Z','►?S-,-. ��•�i�i;.Ls >,�-i :�e..ms}ti,ls,kt,�:•.F�}.• ��:?t q,t>.y. S_c_.� .->7'r► , r i�_•7'.1'2'.•Awr•►�1�.. `•i1 'rt��§l-••Ii,,.�r.f{Y er,:� i^Y•i'-'aY'..� :t� ��i.}bf_.� .. . 0;ti _ y_ 1iitirse_- -rr�•ir,,'>• ? ':i�.rfifr„'l.t .a,f•�i, '�7�'r#•"a'.; "'•c.y.Y*y..�� �.+��/:^;•�tij'+`,1 �f,r._;.'} •'l�r�r,.-,ti..r',vr�Sr�->•.i�f'�'�rat sr.�.1]"Grtf';•.t ;r kia.T',1.•' :r ,-i''.r{.•`Y[-r(�#` '�-- . •;�-"•' ��.' `:i��;.ly'r�1r`.tri';•iwf. �- ti/r r>�_.+. {7rr},."t-t•t�. wt., R'F•.ra ." '_i./t�.L`r�lr--...,+.�,F�'. '.rr�s•,jf.}._' -��r.�L. ►,-,. `
9,",5
41'
4L '' r-"
45 'FS:•i.:1ti
.
Ar
•r:f-
�
■}. t:a'�f.r
'. .y •r -:r C'' T y' _'4� �. ��,: fi•i� xl :r• •l'.• 'J•+ '� ,r}'_ 4 -t [4 re r •.S _ r ..
:� 1 �-.lr} 'r•• } y•Y• •r .. s r, s: <<' ,r. S ♦ :1r � .['�. .�'_ - '� ,'� 1t,• •, 5 �,. .
��' r r .� �'''• }, •, :i r.- .1' i t1•rrrr .. •l' .i. •- t .. f. .! �r',�i .'h i - •1 { � rr r 'i * 1
. >��'ti i•`• .-.'� 1. - �, 'F iL l,i; .Ir r ` t r 5 +� ,'• ,y! ` 7 '�. 1 ,R• !. . y . •tr
1+ q.�. ���• •rl_� .L -L' ��• 'l l-.�.�{1 •* -ir 'Y _ - It
i .� �• .. .iS fir• .. ,1 �•�' r{ 't _ r ..,
.. �.1 �.• •s tea! L �r,y�• y 'x _ +5• �
•v 1 �' -` ..y � _ ', � _ _ '��: ! L' - -2 L •� i tom`.. 4 .� �• { 4 • _ c -
1 r t� err �•'- t .T•i•s�'i , '.• t ��. y';• �,. j t'•�r - -. _� - _ r. .ti' -
r la .• 7 . f ., r •.. �y r ,rl i t ... -
! ). y 'r' r L`•, a i ,i ,1 ; . •- i` ,. i r r7 ._t .
7 i ,� _NA._ ir• 'a .. r. •, �'�e i• , r, .x c Y t ,<: ,.. � _ "a 3 .i,i . r t ! _ : I•..1: •�
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: OCTOBER 21,1997
APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 20
REQUEST: TULLY PARK IMPACT FEE OFFSET AGREEMENT
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERIC:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
V
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
4 4 n"IV 4i
SUSAN S. EASTLAKE, President
GARY E. RICHARDSON, Vice President
SHERRY R. HUBER, Secretary
Ar
Brad Watson EIT
City of Meridian
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83642
RE: Tully Park
IMPACT FEE OFFSET AGREEMENT
IFA -44-97
Dear Brad:
f
SEP 2 2 1997
MERIDIAN CITY ENGINEER
/00 September 18, 1997
OFFLET LETTER 2
Please review the attached Impact Fee offset Agreement for your project and if it is acceptable to
you, sign it, have your signature notarized and return the original Agreement and Warranty Deed
to me. Upon ACID's receipt and approval of the signed Agreement and Deed, the amount due to
you will be processed for payment. This process will take up to thirty days from receipt of the
signed Agreement and Deed.
Sincerely,
Itir�PV
Larry Sale
Impact Fee Administrator
cc: IFA-chronlf lelcorresp
ada county highway district
318 East 37th •Boise, Idaho 83714-6499 •Phone (208) 345-760
C
DATE RECORDED
INSTRUMENT #
BOOK #
PAGE(S) #
ROAD IMPACT FEE OFFSET AGREEMENT
NO. IFA -44--97
BENEFIT ZONE: West Ada
PROJECT NAME: Tully Park Development
DEVELOPER City of Meridian
33 east Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 53642
(ADDRESS EF DEFFERENT FROM APPLICANT)
PROJECT LOCATION: East side of Linder Road between Cherry Lane and
114 mile south of Ustick Road
This Agreement is entered into this day of , 19 by and between the ADA COUNTY
HIGHWAY DISTRICT, a Body Politic and Corporate of the State of Idaho, acting by and through its
authorized representative and:
City of Meridian
(Name of Applicant(s)
52-6004225
(Social Security # or Tax ID #)
whose current mailing address is ,(SEE ABOVE), for the purpose herein below stated:
I. ACHD ORDINANCE NO. 188: ON FEBRUARY 10, 1993, THE ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY
DISTRICT APPROVED ORDINANCE NO. 188 ESTABLISIiQNG A PROGRAM OF ROAD
IMPACT FEES. SECTION 15 OF THAT ORDINANCE PROVIDES FOR OFFSETS
AGAINST ROAD IWACT FEES, FOR QUALHWING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
PROVIDED BY A DEVELOPER, AND INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS:
A. In the calculation of road impact fees for a particular project, offsets shall be given for the
value of any construction of system improvements or contribution or dedication of land or
money required by ACRD from a developer for system improvements.
B. Offsets will only be allowed if the proposed improvements are contained in- the capital
improvements plan, and if the person seeking the offset applies to ACHD in writing prior to
breaking ground or otherwise commencing construction of the breaking ground or otherwise
commencing construction of the improvements, and if ACRD approves the improvement in
writing.
C. A developer who is required to construct, fund or contribute system improvements in excess
of the road impact fees which would otherwise have been paid for the development project,
shall be reimbursed for such excess construction, funding or contribution from road impact
fees paid by development located In the benefit zone which is benefitted by such
improvements.
Any such reimbursements shall be made within three months of the dedication or acceptance
of construction unless otherwise agreed.
D. If offsets or reimbursements are due to the developer pursuant to this section, the parties shall
enter into a written agreement, negotiated in good faith, prior to the construction, funding or
contribution.
E. The amount of an offset resulting from a right-of-way dedication shall not exceed the greater
of the fair market value of, or the acquisition costs attributable to, the real property so
dedicated.
F. The amount of an offset resulting from a qualified capital improvement shall not exceed the
developer's out-of-pocket construction cost for the improvement.
II. THE PURPOSES OFTHIS AGREEMENT ARE TO: 1) ESTABLISH THE VALUE OF THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATIONS AND/OR QUALIFYING IMPROVEMENTS ELIGIBLE
FOR THE IMPACT FEE OFFSETS, 2) ESTABLISH THE METHOD BY WHICH THE
OFFSET WILL BE PROVIDED, AND 3) LIST OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS.
A. VALUE OF_ QUALIFYING IMPROVEMENTS
The value of the qualifying improvements that are eligible for impact fee offsets is calculated
below:
I .
Right -of -Way Dedication
ITEM DESCRIPTION
SQ.FT.
COST SQ.FT.
TOTAL
East side of Linder Rd between
Cherry Lane, 1/4 mile s/o Ustick Rd
185522
$.19
$35519.00
RIGHT-OF-WAY TOTAL: $39519.04
2. Construction Improvements
ITEM DESCRIPTION
QTY.
UNIT
PRICE
TOTAL
None
0
1 $0.00
1 $0.00
$0.00
CONSTRUCTION TOTAL: $0.00
TOTAL VALUE: $39519.00
B. METHOD BY WHICH OFFSET WILL BE PROVIDED
The applicant shall be fully compensated for the value of the qualifying improvements
determined in Section II.A by the following method:
1. A lump sum payment in the amount of:
$Three Thousand, Five Hundred Nineteen Dollars and 00/100 ($3,519.00)
2
C. OTHER. TERMS AND C ONDITION S
I. Documentation
Appropriate and acceptable written documentation establishing the value of all
dedicated right-of-way and/or construction improvements must be furnished to the
District.
2. Compensation
In consideration of the premises and the mutual agreement of the parties, the cash
payments amount to the full compensation for the land and/or improvements
furnished by the applicant.
3. Assignment
The parties agree that payments, as provided in this Agreement, may not be
assigned, transferred or conveyed to any other person or property.
4. Compliance with Codes, Standards and Specifications
All work by the developer of agent(s) shall comply with all currently adopted
specifications of Ada County Highway District for highway construction in effect at the
time the contract is awarded, except where otherwise noted. All ordinances and
regulations in effect in Ada County and its respective cities, and State of Idaho statutes
relating to such work shall be complied with.
5. Enforceability
If, for any reason a court determines that ACM] ordinance #1.88, or any amendments
thereto or any replacement ordinance, is null and void, then any further obligation
pursuant to this Agreement shall be immediately terminated.
6. Applicable Law
The existence, validity, construction, operation and effect of this Agreement and its
terms and conditions, and the rights and obligations of each of the parties hereto shall
be determined in accordance with and construed pursuant to the laws of the State of
Idaho.
7. Severability
Any provision of this Agreement which may be prohibited by law or otherwise held
invalid shall be ineffective only to the extent of such prohibition or invalidity. Such
determination shall not otherwise invalidate or otherwise invalidate or otherwise render
ineffective all or any of the remaining provisions of this Agreement.
8. No Agency Relationship Created
This Agreement shall not be construed as creating either a partnership or agency an
employment relationship between the parties hereto.
9. Entire Agreement
This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties and superseded
any and all prior correspondence, communications, negotiations, discussions and other
representations of either of the parties hereto. This Agreement may not be modified in
any respect except by an instrument in writing and signed by both parties hereto.
IN WITNEr 'VHEREOF, thearties hereunto have seer sir hand on this da and
P y year,
BY:
Applicant Date
BY: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT
Impact Fee Administrator c $5,000 Date
Director of ACHD c $2531000 Date
President of ACHD Commission > $25,000 Date
STATE OF )
)SS.
COUNTY OF )
On this day of , 19 , before me, a notary public in and for
said State, personally appeared ,known
to me to be the applicant(s) named in hereinabove Agreement and known to me to be the persons whose
name are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same.
IN WITNESS WI1EREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day
and year in this certificate first above written.
(SEAL)
NOTARY PUBLIC OF THE STATE OF
Residing at
City, State
My Commission Expires:
4
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: OCTOBER 2.1,1997
APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER: 21
REQUEST; DEPARTMENT REPORTS
AGENCY COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT.-
CITY
EPT:CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION:
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shad become property of the City of Meridian.
interoffice
MEMORANDUM ovvo
to: Gary Smith, PE
cc: File
from: Brad Watson, E.I.T. 14)
re: WWTP Administration Building
date: October 171, 1997
Ten bids were received for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Administration Building and are
listed below:
1.
Connolly Construction
$288,000
2.
JS Construction
$2851)500
3.
Scott Hedrick Construction
$290,040
4.
Dave Allen Construction
$291,592
5.
Hasegawa & Associates
$3121900
6.
Record Steel & Construction
$3161)504
7.
IBJ Corporation
$3201883
8.
Roth Framing
$322,458
9.
The Ewing Company
$327,500
10.
Wright Brothers
$3277715
The architect's original estimate in their proposal to provide services, dated 3112197, Was
$3081000.
The bid submitted by Connolly Construction meets all bidding and bonding requirements. I
have requested an experience list from them and will check those references prior to Tuesday's
Council meeting.
I spoke with Bill Waite of Thurber & Associates Who designed the from the desk of...
project. He told me everything was a go as far as they were Brad Watson, E.I.T.
concerned. Asst. City En0ineer
City of Meridian
Unless I hear something to the contrary from Connolly 33 East Idaho Ave.
Construction's references I would recommend the contract be Meridian, Idaho 83642
awarded to them. (208) 887_2211
Fax: (208) 887-1297
c:lbwlsl 7\gs1017. mem .dot
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
DATE:
CONTRACT FOR: Ashford Greens Li
ORDER NO.: 2
OWNER: CIN OF MERIDIAN IDAHO
TO: SOMMER CONSTRUCTION INC.
(Contractor)
You are hereby requested to comply with the following chap9 es from the contract
plans and specifications:
Description of Changes In
This Change Order
(lisL§eparately)
I Change Out 8" Sewer in Black Cat
Road to 12" Sewer, approx. 102 If
2. Change Chain Link Fence Gate
Arrangement
Sum of Increase and Decrease:
Net Change in Contract Price:
INCREASE
in Contract
Price
$18,989.09
$200.00
$16,189.00
DECREASE
in Contract
Price
$16,189.00
$0.00
JUSTIFICATION (attach supplemental documents):
1) Existing 8" sewer would not provide adequate capacity into lift station; provide
stub -out service to property to west and south. Changes require eight working days
to complete. Contractor on standby for seven days awaiting authorization of this
change order. 2) Original fence design would not provide adequate access to final
constructed configuration of lift station. Change involved altering lengths between
posts.
CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE:
TOTAL
$19,959.15
doRECEIVED
MERIDIAN POLICE DEPARTMENT
0 C j 2 1 1997
ADDITIONAL BILLS FOR SEPTEMBER 1997
PO#
VENDOR
AMOUNT
P6772
ADA TRANSPORT FUEL
$ 827.86
P6754
ADA TRANSPORT FUEL
$1,958.49
P6755
ADA TRANSPORT FUEL
$27074-62
P5934
TERRITORIAL SUPPLY
$27774-52
P6756
DEPARTMENT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
$7,355.00
P6752
NORTHWEST PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
$ 1,800.00
P6751
CHEVRON
$27268.67
TOTAL
$19,959.15
cl)
WMr
• *W �m
i �(D ❑
{ .
-0-0 �
. CZ)
CL < v
0
❑C5
* -.-_ V) CL � cn -W---cu
}, -- CCS ,� m m SCS ❑
CL 0
-� �CX Q a3 ] m.— 0 N E ❑� �
Ca 0- � ., (!� �3 T3 Q
-C W .�., toV&WJ 03 CL
__..
'�►•� SCS U] 0] �, '€3 ''
< a)cu
ay .CL
'0 U3 m cr
:3_ � SZS W %- 513
LL)
� m U c
`a) Cl) ZW ❑ a) Zz
>
--•- -6-0 -1--& 0 c
Un LU C) 0 E .} ' • SZ a) a � SCS a)m C: � CU
4-4 CA C) 4-- -0 2- E z a) cu
E Lu Q)
W = cn (0 E .2 cn
- C: . cc -E SQ ,� 't� *k �� .�;, �, m SCS
LL
�. .o
CU CD w
Lu PL -a
X CU
co LU C
. '�:..
.� E L--
tf� ❑ U3H C] F- cn to Cr
z (D
X `
L
m C) C ❑ QCD o C) C) ❑ o �� 0 E
co Cl) C5 C Li a CC) Q �' �+ ._
uj m Nr C� (D r%- LO N v � i v
r r � � r � CO � 0�� (a0
-� c .a? <
L!.�a cp �-a
.! _ a) CF)
L -� ❑ •�
I` co CT] C)r— Cti u] S;0 0 0:t-.!Co0) 0) � C) C) C)❑ C) o
.`, 0) � a C� ❑ ❑ ❑ cn
r r r C\! Cil Sal C\l CV ❑ ❑ Sn �"' ❑
a)
4-00
r Z
9
.�
CL
Q
a
iQ)
<
L°
(1)
Q
`.
EE40
LU
Q
z
C
m
c
Q
z
m
FL
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
October 14,, 1997
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY COUNCIL MEMBERS
A Good Place to Live WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
CITY OF MERIDIAN GLENN R. BENTLEY
33 EAST IDAHO
Mr. Larry Sale
Director, Development Services
Ada County Highway District
318 E. 37t" St.
Boise,, Idaho 83714
MERIODIAN, IDAHO 83642 P j& Z QQMMISSION
Phone (208) 8884433 9 FAX (208) 887-4813 JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211 MALCOLM MACCOY
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443 KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
ROBERT D. CORRIE BYRON SMITH
Mayor
R& TULLY PARK — DEVELOPMENT PLANS
Dear Larry:
We are in receipt of your review comments for the development plans of this public park project. We
appreciate your approval of our request to separate the sidewalk from the curb and gutter along Linder
Road so the location of the existing power line poles can be i flained.
This project is funded from our property tax generated General Fund. As such, the expended funds need to
be directed to physical park improvements. A part of your plan review comments requires payment of
$72,250. into the ACHD Road Trust Fund. We are told this payment is to cover one-half (1/2) the cost of
constructing a future bridge across Five Mile Creek to coincide with the future extension of NW I PhAve.
It is our opinion that the property to be served by a future extension of NW I I"" Ave. will not be developed
in the near future. The taxpayers of Meridian will better realize the benefit of investing this money in
construction of Tully Park than by placing it in a Trust Fund for construction of a facility that has no date
certain. We do not understand your requirement making us responsible for trust the construction of
one -hal of a bridge structure that has no beneficial impact to the functioning of this park- We assume this
requirement is based on the very short length of contiguity between the park and a future extension of this
street,, which we do not feel is relevant to the development of this park.
We would appreciate co on that extension of NW 1 PhSt is required for traffic circulation and not
because the street was stubbed in that direction in 1980. This is the only proposed crossing of Five Mile
Creek between Meridian Road and Linder Road and it is connecting a property that has a sizable frontage
to Ustick Road and is connected to existing subdivision roadways to the east and to the west.
6 S*ncerely,,
n er 'y
Mayor Robert D. Corrie Counc' Wa Moffow erm
Councilman Charlie Rountree C ci an Ron Tolsma
Cc: File
OFFICIALS
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. "BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83542
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
October 22, 1997
Mr. Jerrold D. Gregg
Snare River Area Manager
Bureau of Reclamation
214 Broadway
Boise, ID 83702
Subject: City of Meridian Park System
Dear Mr. Gregg:
QOQNQIL.MEMBERS
WALT W. MORROW, President
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
BYRON SMITH
As you well know, the City of Meridian has a dire need for park and recreation areas.
City officials have previously discussed with your staff possibilities of a Cityg reenbelt
pathway along the Five Mile Drain within the federal lands and easements connecting
Tully Park with adjacent neighborhoods.
After looking into this matter further, the width (up to 140 feet) of those federal lands
offer additional opportunities for a linear park and possibly tennis courts. The City's
25,000 residents would make great use of such facilities and be deeply appreciative of
your agency.
Please accept this letter as a formal request from the City of Meridian for a license to
use the federal lands along the Five Mile Drain between Linder and Meridian Roads for
public recreation purposes.
The City recognizes that operation and maintenance of the Five Mile Drain remains
paramount. The City anticipates no activities within the drain right-of-way, as defined in
Idaho Code 42-1102, inconsistent with the rights of the United States or the Nampa
Meridian Irrigation District.
We would also appreciate your guidance as to how the City might facilitate an eventual
public discount conveyance of the land to the City for public park or recreational
purposes.
We look forward to a positive reply at your soonest convenience.
Sincerely yours,
0
ert D. Corrie
Mayor
Walter Morrow Charlie Roui
City Councilman City Councilman
City Councilman
olsma
City Councilman
m �fI19
E
m
The fallowing election judges and clerks for the November 4th, 1997 city of
Meridian General Election have been selected for your approval:
First Precinct #800 @American Legion Hall, 22 W. Broadway
June Pack -Judge
524 W. Carlton Avenue
888-2839
Annalee Luke
1529 W. 7th Street
888-2899
Patrica Roberts - Clerk
1523 N. Meridian Road
888-2581
(Bill) William G. Berg, Sr.
231 W. Washington Avenue
888-1822
Second Precinct #801 @City Hall, 33 E. Idaho Avenue
LaWana Niemann -Judge
505 W. Carlton Avenue
888-2812
Rosemary Lowe -Clerk
1425 W. 7th Street
888-3389
Debbie Warwick - Clerk
558 E. Kingsford Drive
888-5728
Eloise Stemple - clerk
1114 W. 8th Street
888--1285
Third Precinct #802 @Meridian Library, 1326 W. Cherry Lane
Linda Berg -Judge
612 Tiffany Drive
888-1843
Michelle Dances -- Clerk
2379 N. Dixie Place
888-5881
Holly Farris - Clerk
2295 N. Lochness Way
888-9832
Lauri Swanbeck - Clerk
944 C laybourne Drive
888-5548
Alternate: Renee' Keller
587 E. Kingsford Drive
888--2551
Marion Boston -Clerk
424 W. Cherry Lane
888-4829
Sheri Baker - clerk
1748 Jericho Road
888-1439
Nikki Tompkins - Clerk
2529 N. Capecod Way
888-1937
Page 1
J
All the listed judges have served in preceding elections.
PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this 21st day of
October, 1997.
APPROVED:
CORRIE, MAYOR
ATTESTED:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., 1 CLERK
Fuge 2
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor & pity council Members
From: William G. Berg, Jr., city clerk
]ate: October 20, 1997
RE: Approval of election judges & clerks
Attached is a copy of the election judges and their clerks the hav
• y e selected for
the up coming city election. This list of judges and clerks meet the .qualifications
that are required. l would appreciate your approval at the October 21
pp 21st city
council meeting under department reports. if you have any questions, please
contact me. Thank you.
Linda Berg - Judge
612 Tiffany Drive
888-1848
Michelle Danies - clerk
2370 N. Dixie Place
888-5881
Holly Farris - clerk
2205 N. Lochness Way
888-9832
Lauri Swanbeck - Clerk
944 Claybourne Drive
888-5546
Alternate: Renee' Keller
587 B. Kingsford Drive
888-2551
Marion Boston -Clerk
424 W. Cherry Lane
888-4829
Sheri Baker - clerk
1748 Jericho Road
888-1439
Nikki Tompkins - Clerk
2520 N. Dapecod Way
888-1037
Page 1
All the listed judges have served in preceding elections.
PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this 21st day of
October, 1997.
ATTESTED:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CITY CLERK
APPROVED:
ROBERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
Page 2
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
APPLICATION OF 'W'ILLIAM To BITTER. D . D . S .
FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW AN OFF PREMISE SIGN
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled variance request having come on for
consideration on October 7, 1997, at approximately 7:30 o'clock
p.m. on said date, at the Meridian. City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street,
Meridian, Idaho, and the City Council having heard and taken oral
and written testimony, the City Council of the City of Meridian
makes the following:.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of the public hearing on the variance was
published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing
for October 7, :1997, the first publication of which was fifteen
(15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly
considered at the October 7, 1997, hearing; that copies of all
notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
2. That notice of public hearing is required to be sent to
property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the
land being considered pursuant to 11--2-416 E . , 11--2-419 D. , and 11-
9-612 B. 1.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of
Meridian; that this requirement has been met.
3. That the property is zoned L -O (Limited office
District) .
4. That the Applicant's application states that the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
VARIANCE -- WILLIAM To RITTER, D * D . S .
Applicant is requesting a variance for an off premise sign at 317
W. Cherry Lane; that Applicant is currently operating a dental
office at 313 W. Cherry Lane; that Applicant's office is located
to the rear of the property without any street frontage; that
businesses are expanding around Applicant, obstructing visibility
of Applicant's office; that Applicant would like to replace the
existing monument sign coverage with a new sign that is higher,
lists new tenants, and is on the street; that the location is off
the premises, but that it is necessary to give :Applicant' s business
the visibility needed for patients to locate his office and to
Compete with surrounding businesses.
5. The property in question is described in the variance
application and is incorporated herein as if set forth in full.
6* That at the public hearing, the Applicant testified that
he would like to replace his sign that has been there since 1988 to
include the other dentists in his practice; that the new sign will
direct patients back to the building as well as provide signage for
other tenants in the area.
7. The Planning and Zoning Administrator, Shari Stiles,
commented that she has no problems with the structure of the sign
so long as it meets the setback requirements and that the height of
the sign is about the same as another that just went in on the
corner. That the Applicant already has a sign there, and so this
is a unique situation since he is just replacing the present sign
with a larger one.
8. That the Applicant has the consent of the property owner.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
VARIANCE -- WILLIAM T. RITTER, D.D.S.
9. That the City Engineer, Meridian Fire Department, Ada
County Highway District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, and
the Central District Health Department comments, if any, are
incorporated herein.
10. There was no further testimony at the hearing,
CONCLUSIONS
].. That all the procedural requirements of the Local
Planning Act and of the ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met including the mailing off7f-notice to owners of property
y
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's
property.
2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant
to Section 11--2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to Section
11--9--512 of the Development Ordinances.
3. That the City Council has judged this application by the
guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the
Subdivision and. Development Ordinance and upon the record submitted
to it and the things upon which it may take judicial notice.
4. That the Council may take judicial notice of its own
proceedings, those of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
governmental statutes, ordinancesf and policies, and of actual
conditions existing within the City and the State.
5. That Section 11-9--415 C. of the City of Meridian Zoning
Ordinance, which is pertinent to this application, states as
follows:
PROHIBITED SIGNS
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAS]' - PAGE 3
VARIANCE,. -WILLIAM T. RITTER, D.D.S.
The following activities and types of signs shall be expressly
prohibited in all districts except as otherwise provided by
this Ordinance:
6. Off -premise signs
6. That the following provision of Section 11-2-419 A., of
the City of Meridian Zoning ordinance is noted which is pertinent
to the Application:
2-419 A. GENERAL
The Council may authorize in specific cases a variance from
the terms of this Ordinance or from the Subdivision and
Development Ordinances as will not be contrary to the public
interest where, owing to special conditions, a literal
enforcement of the provisions of this Ordinance would result
in unnecessary hardship. No non -conforming use of neighboring
lands, structures or buildings in the same district and no
permitted or non --conforming use of lands, structures or
buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for
issuance of a variance. Variances shall be granted only where
strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would
result in unnecessary hardship. A variance application does
not go to the Commission unless directed by the Council.
7. That the specific requirements regarding a variance
that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are as
follows:
2-419 C FINDINGS
A variance shall not be granted unless (as a result of a
public hearing) the Council makes a statement of supportive
reasons based directly on the evidence presented to it which
supports conclusions that the mentioned standards and
conditions of this Ordinance have been met by the applicant
and unless all of the following exist:
1. That there are such special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application of the
provisions of this Ordinance would clearly be
impracticable or unreasonable; (Ord. 430, 4-2-84)
2. That strict compliance with the requirements of this
.Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the
owner, subdivider or developer because of unusual
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
VARIANCE - WILLIAM T. RITTER, D.D.S.
topography, the nature or condition of adjacent
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 achievements or the objectives
of this ordinance, (Ord. 592, 11-17-92)
3. That the granting of the specified variance will not be
detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other
property in the area in which the property is situated;
and
4. That such variance will not have the effect of altering
the interest and purpose of this ordinance and the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
8o That regarding Section 11-2-419 Co it is specifically
concluded as follows:
a. That there are such special circumstances or
conditions affecting the property that the strict
application of the off premise sign prohibition of
this ordinance would clearly be impracticable or
unreasonable in that Applicant already has a sign
in that same location; that Applicant's business is
located off the street, without any street
frontage; that with businesses going in all around
Applicant's business, his signage is presently
inadequate in location, size, and it does not
presently have room to list all tenants, which the
new larger sign could do, ridding the area of a
cluster of various signs.
b. That strict compliance with the requirements of
this ordinance would result in extraordinary
hardship to the owner/Applicant because his
business is located off the street without any
street frontage, his sign is currently too small,
obstructed by surrounding development, and is
constructed low to the ground, which does not
permit the visibility needed for continued growth
of Applicant's business, making strict compliance
with this ordinance unreasonable under the
circumstances.
C* That the granting of the specified variance will
not be detrimental to the public's welfare or
injurious to other property in the area in which
the property is situated; and
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PACE 5
VARIANCE - WILLIAM T. RITTERr D.D.S.
d. That such variance will not have the effect of
altering the interest and purpose of this Ordinance
and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
90 That it is concluded the Application f or variance of the
off premise sign prohibition of the City of Meridian Zoning
Ordinance be granted, provided that the sign is constructed exactly
as depicted in the plan submitted, that it is no taller, no wider,
and shall not have any business listings lower than ten feet from
the ground.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby approve
these Findings of Fact and Conclusions*
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTED
COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED
COUNCILMAN_ROUNTREE VOTED
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PACE f
VARIANCE -- WILLIAM T. BITTER, D.D.S.
.........
t{
DE N S I oN
That it is decided the Application for a variance to the off
premise sign prohibition by Applicant William Ritter is granted,
provided that the sign is constructed exactly as depicted in the
plan submitted, that it is no taller, no wider, and shall not have
any business listings lower than ten feet from the ground,.
DISAPPROVED*
FINDINGS of FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7
VARIANCE - WILLIAM T. BITTER, D.D.S.
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
APPLICATION OF LUMBERMEN'S BUILDING CENTER
FOR A VARIANCE TO REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE
PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY AND REQUIREMENT
FOR 20 FOOT PLANTING STRIP
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled variance request having come on for
consideration on October 7, 1997, at approximately 7:30 o'clock
P.M. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street,
Meridian, Idaho, and the City Council having heard and taken oral
and written testimony, the City Council of the City of Meridian
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of the public hearing on the variance was
published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing
for October 7. 1997, the first publication of which was fifteen
(15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly
considered at the October 7, 1997, hearing; that copies of all
notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
2. That notice of public hearing is required to be sent to
property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the
land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E., 11-2-419 419 D. , and 11--
9--612 B. 1.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of
Meridian;- that this requirement has been met.
3. That the property is zoned I -L (Light Industrial).
4. That the Applicant's application states that the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 1
VARIANCE - LUMBERMEN -FS BUILDING CENTER
Applicant is requesting a variance to the pedestrian walkway
requirement and the twenty foot planting strip requirement at the
Lumbermen' s Building Center at 415 E. Broadway; that Lumbermen' s is
currently using only a portion of the building as a satellite yard
to support its main yard at 632 E . 1st Street; that Lumbermen' s is
negotiating with Boise cascade r the present owner of the building,
for purchase of the entire building to be used for Lumbermen's
entire facility; that the property on which the building sits is
owned by _the- .railroad and cannot be sold to Lumbermen's; that if
Lumbermen' s were forced to put in curbs, gutters, and sidewalks it
would not be cost effective since Luumbermen' s will never own said
property; that the planting strip requirement will leave only S
feet between the store and the edge of the planting strip for
parking in front; that Lumbermen's would have to make additional
parking elsewhere, thus cutting down on usable space on the
property for operation as a lumber yard; that an existing fence
will be repaired to shield the view from the residence across the
street from the facility; that there are currently no curbs,
gutters, or sidewalks on the south side of Broadway, and thus the
curbs, gutters, and sidewalks Lumbermen's would install would dead
end into an empty field; that ACRD has a right of way for 4th
street to be extended through the property at a later dater
destroying all the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks Lumbermen's would
install.
5. The entire property in question is described in the
variance application and is incorporated herein as if set forth in
FINDINGS of FACT & CONCLUSIONS of LAW - PAGE 2
VARIANCE - LUMBERM.EN' S BUILDING CENTER
full.
5. That at the public hearing, the Applicant's
representative, Ed Pierce, testified that there are no curbs and
gutters in the neighborhood; that it would cost .Applicant too much
to put in curbs and gutters on property it will never own; that the
ACHD has a 100 foot right of way down Broadway and that ACHD has
stated they only need 50 feet and that Applicant can apply for a 32
foot vacation of the property, making it possible to get at least
a 12--15 foot planting strip in between the sidewalk and the fence;
that ACRD may require that Applicant put in a curb, gutter, and
sidewalk anyway; and that Applicant intends to increase the amount
of landscaping to shield the view of their lumberyard along this
planting strip.
7. Councilmen Morrow, Bentley and Rountree all expressed
their opinion that they intend to grant the requested variances.
8. That the City Engineer, Meridian Fire Department, Ada
County Highway District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. and
the central District Health Department comments, if any, are
incorporated herein.
9. There was public testimony opposing the Application given
by Tina Sako and Julie Brown that they do not want Lumbermen's in
their neighborhood. Mayor Corrie and Councilman Morrow informed
the ladies that it was only a hearing regarding the variance
request.
10. There was no further testimony at the hearing.
FINDING OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
VARIANCE -- LUMBERMEN' S BUILDING CENTER
CONCLUSIONS
I. That all the procedural requirements of the Local
Planning Act and of the ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant ' s
property.
2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant
to Section 11-2--419 of the Zoning ordinance and pursuant to Section
11-9-612 df the Development Ordinances.
3. That the City Council has judged this application by the
guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the
Subdivision and Development ordinance and upon the record submitted
to it and the things upon which it may take judicial notice.
4. That the Council may take judicial notice of its own
proceedings, those of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual
conditions existing within the City and the State.
5-a That the following provision of Section 11-9-605 G,
PLANTING STRIPS, of the Subdivision and Development ordinance is
noted which is pertinent to the Application:
That Section 11-9--505 G 1. states as follows
1. 'Planting Stri s -- Planting strips shall be required
to be placed next to incompatible features such as
highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to
screen the view from residential properties. Such
screening shall be minimum of twenty feet ( 2 0 ' } wide, and
shall not be a part of the normal street right of way or
utility easement. . ..
5. That Section 11-2-410 B 3. of the Zoning ordinance states
FINDINGS of FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 4
VARIANCE -- LUMBERMEN' S BUILDING CENTER
in part as follows.
"Re uirements for Non -Residential Uses Abuttin
Residential Districts - Screening and/or other buffer
requirements., as stipulated by the commission or Council,
shall be provided."
7* That Section 11-9-606 B. of the Subdivision and
Development ordinance states as follows:
3. Curbs and Gutters: Vertical curbs and gutters shall be
constructed on collector and arterial streets. Rolled
curbs and gutters shall be required on minor streets.
All construction shall be in accordance with the
standards and specifications adopted by the Ada County
Highway District and the City Councilor
11. Sidewalks and Pedestrian Walkways. Five foot (5')
sidewalks shall be required on both sides of the street,
except where the average width of lots, as measured at
the street frontage line or at the building setback line,
is over one hundred feet (100'), sidewalks on only one
side of the street may be allowed. Pedestrian walkways
when required, shall have easements at least ten feet
(101) in width and include a paved walk at least five
feet (5') in width. sidewalks and crosswalks shall be
constructed in accordance with the standards and
specifications as adopted by the council;
8 . That the following provision of Section 11-9-512 A. 1.
of the Subdivision and Development ordinance is noted which is
pertinent to the Application:
11-9-612 A. 1. PURPOSE
The council, as a result of unique circumstances (such as
topographic - physical limitations or a planned unit
development ) , may grant variances from the provisions of this
Ordinance on a finding that undue hardship results from the
strict compliance with specific provisions or requirements of
the Ordinance or that application of such provision or
requirement is impracticable.
9. That the specific requirements regarding a variance
that must be evidenced and found by the City council are as
follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 5
VARIANCE -- LUMBERMEN' S BUILDING CENTER
11-9-612 Ao 2. , FINDINGS
No variance shall be favorably acted upon by the Council
unless there is a finding, as a result of a public hearing,
that all of the following exist:
a. That there are such special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application of the
provisions of this Ordinance would clearly be
impracticable or unreasonable; in such cases, the
subdivider shall first state his reasons in writing as to
the specific provision or requirement involved;
b. That the strict compliance with the requirements of this
Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the
subdivider because of unusual topography, other physical
conditions or other such conditions which are not self--
inflicted, or that these conditions would result in
inhibiting the achievement of the objectives of this
Ordinance;
C* That the granting of the specified variance will not be
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the area in which the property is situated;
d. That such variance will not violate the provisions of the
Idaho Codec and
e . That such variance will not have the effect of nullifying
the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the
Comprehensive Plan.
10. That in regards to the Application for a variance from
the 11-9-605 G. PLANTING STRIPS AND RESERVE STRIPS, it is concluded
as follows in the Conclusions below.
11. That 11-9-505 G 1. requires that planting strips be
placed next to incompatible features such as commercial uses to
screen the view from residential properties, and because there are
houses so close to the Lumbermen's property, it mares complete
sense that a planting strip be required.
12. That there have been industrial uses in that area for
FINDINGS OTS' FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PACE 6
VARIANCE - LUMBERMEN' S BUILDING CENTER
many years and the use of the property as a lumberyard is simply an
expansion of its present use as a lumberyard now; that a twenty
foot planting strip, depending on what was placed in the planting
strip, would likely not provide a suf f icient land width to provide
an of f ective screening or buf f eying f rom the likely impacts of the -
lumberyard, including noise and the truck traffic going to and from
the lumberyard.
13. That regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2 . , it is specifically
concluded as follows.
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application of
the provisions of the planting strip Ordinance would
clearly be unreasonable, as to only have a twenty foot
planting strip may not be sufficient to buffer and screen
the houses surrounding the lumberyard; that a smaller
planting strip heavily landscaped will likely be more
sufficient; that installation of curbs, gutters, and
sidewalks on property which cannot ever be owned by
applicant and which may be improved in the near future,
thus destroying said curbs, gutters, and sidewalks would
pose undue expense on the Applicant* and that there are
no existing curbs, gutters, or sidewalks in the area.
b. That strict compliance with the requirements of these
Ordinances would likely result in extraordinary hardship
to the Applicant because no additional, land can be
obtained to provide a twenty foot planting strip without
giving up much needed parking in front, it may also cause
extraordinary hardship to the surrounding residents if
inadequate buffering is provided on a twenty foot strip,
and that curbs, gutters and sidewalks are not commonly
found in that neighborhood, so they would be a burdensome
expense.
c. That the granting of the variances would not be
detrimental to the public's welfare and possibly
injurious to the public so long as the Applicant provides
sufficient landscaping as a requirement placed on the
granting of the variances.
do That the variances would not have the effect of altering
the interests and purposes of the Planting Strip
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7
VARIANCE - LUMBERMEN'S BUILDING CENTER
Ordinance and the Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk ordinance if
the Applicant provides dense landscaping, this being a
condition of the granting of these variances.
14. That 11-2--418 Cr SITE PLANNING REVIEW, states in part as
follows:
In addition to any other requirements contained in this
Zoning ordinance or in the Subdivision ordinance, the City in
its discretion may require, as a condition of approval, that
any use, development or construction have the plans, design,
plat, specifications, drawings, actual construction,
landscaping, etc., reviewed and approved by the City."
15. It is further concluded that there should not be a total
variance of the 11.9-605 G, but a variance that allows the
Applicant to not meet the full twenty feet requirement, but as a
„quid -pro quo, that the Applicant provide sufficient screening,
buffering and landscaping to shield the surrounding houses.
16. That 11-2-413 B, PROVISIONS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
USES, 1. , states that no land or building shall be used or occupied
in any manner creating objectionable conditions adversely affecting
the surrounding areas, except that any use permitted by this
Ordinance may be undertaken and maintained if acceptable measures
and safeguards are taken to reduce dangerous and objectionable
conditions
17. That it is concluded that the Variances should be
granted, provided that the Applicant submits a landscape, screen
and buffer plan to the Planning and Zoning Administrator showing
how the Applicant proposes to provide screening and buffering for
the homes that surround the lumberyard; that the plan may show less
than a twenty foot strip but it must show that there will be
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 8
VARIANCE - LUMBERMENfS BUILDING CENTER
suf f icient screening and buf f ering f or the neighbors f that the plan
may be submitted to the council if the Planning and Zoning
Administrator believes that it should be approved by the Council.
18. That if the Applicant is in agreement with these Findings
of Fact and Conclusions of Law and the Decision, it shall submit
the required plan to the Planning and Zoning Administrator as soon
as possible, and before December 1■ 1997 f if the Applicant is not
in agreement the Application shall be deemed denied; that if the
Applicant- is not -. in Agreement it shall submit a letter so informing
the City within ten (18) days of October 21, 1997.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby approve
these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTED
COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 9
VARIANCE - LUMBERMEN'S BUILDING CENTER
DECISION
That it is decided the variances to the requirement to provide
curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, and the requirement for a. twenty
foot (201) planting strip by Lumbermen' s is granted, provided that
Lumbermen's submits a landscaping plan to the Planning and Zoning
Administrator on or before December 1, 1997, as a condition of
approval.
DISAPPROVED:
PROVED
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LA'W' - PAGE 10
VARIANCE .._LUMBERMEN'S BUILDING CENTER
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
APPLICATION OF WESTPARK COMPANYrINC.
FOR A VARIANCE OF THE 1000 FOOT BLOC{ REQUIREMENT AND
A VARIANCE FOR PIPING OF THE RIDENBAUGH CANAL,
EIGHT -MILE LATERAL AND NINE -MILE DRAIN
FINDINGS OF FACT .AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled variance request having come on for
consideration on October 7, 1997, at approximately 7:30 o'clock
P.M. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street,
Meridian, Idaho,, and the City Council having heard and taken oral
and written testimony, the City Council of the City of Meridian
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice o'f the public hearing on the variance was
published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing
for October 7, 1997, the first publication of which was fifteen
(15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly
considered at the October 7, 1997, hearing; that copies of all
notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
2. That notice of public hearing is required to be sent to
property owners within 340 feet of the external boundaries of the
land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E., 11-2-419 D., and 11-
9-612
.1.-
9-612 Bo l . b . of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of
Meridian; that this requirement has been met.
3. That the property is zoned R-4.
4. That the Applicant's application states that the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW -- PAGE 1
VARIANCE - SHERBROOKE SUBDIVISIONIWESTPARK CO. INC.
Applicant is proposing a 140 lot single family residential
development in Sherbrooke Hollow Subdivision. That this block
length variance is requested f or blocks 2, 7, and 8 ; that blocks 2 ,
7, and 8 exceed the maximum block length of 1000 feet due to the
unusual configuration of the parcel which limits the lot layout
alternatives, creating longer block lengths; that block 2 abuts the
Eight -Mile Lateral, prohibiting a discontinuation of the block with
a stub street or micropath; that block 7 borders an unrelated
parcel, .Ada County Highway District determined the location of the
stub street, which location creates a block which exceeds the 1000
foot requirement by 80 feet* that block 8 is located in the
southeast and northeast portion of the parcels that two micropaths
have been provided to break the block length. That this piping
r
variance is requested because the Ridenbaugh Canal and the Eight-
r
Mile Lateral far exceed the 48 -inch pipe size set forth by the City
as a size limitation for. tiling; that other developments in the
area have been required to leave open the Nine -Mile Drain running
adjacent to the Ridenbaugh; that Applicant suspects the Bureau of
Reclamation will request the drain be open; that the drain collects
seepage from the Ridelibau h along the southeast corner; that
Applicant intends to relocate a portion of the drain on the north
side of the property.
5. The entire property in question is described in the
subdivision application and is incorporated herein as if set forth
in full.
6. That at the public hearing, the Applicant testified the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 2
VARIANCE - SHERBROOKE SUBD IVI S I ON WESTPARX COO INC.
Eight Mile Lateral, the Ridenbaugh canal, and the Nine Mile Drain,
if piped, would require piping in excess of 48" in diameter; that
the Bureau of Reclamation has required that the Nine Mile Drain be
left open in the adjoining subdivision; that the unusual features
on the property make blocks 2, 7, and 8 difficult to lay out in
compliance with the block length ordinance; that mi.cropath
connections will be provided to break up the longer block lengths;
and that without variances, the property cannot be economically
developed because it is unusual in shape and configuration.
7 . That the Applicant has the consent of the property owner.
8. That the City Engineer, Meridian Fire Department, Ada
County Highway District, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District or
the Central District Health Department comments, if submitted, are
incorporated herein.
9. There was no further testimony at the hearing.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local
Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's
property.
2* That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant
to Section 11-2--419 of the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to Section
11--9--612 of the Development Ordinances.
3. That the City Council has judged this application by the
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 3
VARIANCE - SHERBROOKE SUBDIVISION`WESTPARK CO. INC.
guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the
Subdivision and Development ordinance and upon the record submitted
to it and the things upon which it may take judicial notice.
4* That the Council may take judicial. notice of its own
proceedings, those of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
governmental statutes, ordinances, and policies, and of actual
conditions existing within the City and the State.
5. That Section 11--9-605 E. of the Subdivision and
Development Ordinance states as follows:
Every block shall be so designed as to provide two (2)
tiers of lots, except where lots back onto an arterial
street, natural feature or subdivision boundary; blocks
shall not be less than five hundred feet (500f) nor more
than one thousand (1000') in length.
6. That Section 11--9-605 M. of the Subdivision and
Development Ordinance states as follows:
All irrigation ditches, laterals or canals, exclusive of
natural waterways, intersecting, crossing, or lying
adjacent and contiguous, or which canals, ditches or
laterals touch either or both sides of the area being
subdivided, shall be covered and enclosed with tiling or
other covering equivalent in ability to detour access to
said ditch, lateral or canal. The City may waive this
requirement for covering such ditch, lateral or canal if
it finds that the public purpose requiring such will not
be served in the individual case.
7. That the following provision of Section 11.--9-612 A. 1. ,
of the Subdivision and Development ordinance is noted which is
pertinent to the Application
11-9-612 A . ' 1. PURPOSE
The Council, as a result of unique circumstances (such as
topographic - physical limitations or a planned unit
development ) , may grant variances from the provisions of this
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 4
VARIANCE - SHERBROOKE SUBDIVISIONIWESTPARK CO. INC.
Ordinance on a finding that undue hardship results from the
strict compliance with specific provisions or requirements of
the Ordinance or that application of such provision or
requirement is impracticable.
8. That the specific requirements regarding a variance
that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are as
follows:
11-9--512 A. 2 . , FINDINGS
No variance shall be favorably acted upon by the Council
unless there is a finding, as a result of a public hearing,
that all of the following exist
a. That there are such special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application of the
provisions of this ordinance would clearly be
impracticable or unreasonable; in such cases, the
subdivider shall first state his reasons in writing as to
the specific provision or requirement involved;
b. That the strict compliance with the requirements of this
Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the
subdivider because of unusual topography, other physical
conditions or other such conditions which are not self-
inflicted, or that these conditions would result in
inhibiting the achievement of the objectives of this
Ordinance;
CIO That the granting of the specified variance will not be
-detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the area in which the property is situated;
d. That such variance will not violate the provisions of the
Idaho Code; and
e. That such variance will not have the effect of nullifying
the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the
Comprehensive Plan.
9. That there does appear to be a specific benefit or
10
profit, economic gain or convenience to the Applicant in granting
Applicant a variance from block length requirements and a variance
from the piping requirement and that undue hardship and expense
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PACE 5
VARIANCE - SHERBROOKE SUBDIVISICNIWESTPARK CO. INC.
would result if the variances are not granted.
10. That regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2. it is specifically
concluded as follows;
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property making the strict
application of the provisions of the block length
ordinance and piping Ordinance clearly unreasonable
given the unusual configuration of the parcel and
the size of the Eight Mile Lateral and the
Ridenbaugh Canal for piping.
b. That the granting of the variance of block length
.would prevent extraordinary hardship to the owner,
subdivider, or developer because of the unusual
configuration of the parcel, whish limits the lot
layout alternatives. The granting of the variance
for piping would prevent extraordinary hardship to
the owner subdivider, or developer because both the
Ridenbaugh Canal and Eight --Mile Lateral exceed the
48 -inch pipe size requirement,, and the Nine --Mile
Drain will likely be required to be left open.
c. That the granting of variances would not be
detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to
ether property in the area in which the property is
situated.
d. That the granting of the variances would not
violate the provisions of the Idaho Code.
e. That the variances would not have the effect of
altering the interests and purposes of these
Ordinances or the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
ll. That as to th6 request for variance of piping under
Section 11-9--505 M. of the Subdivision and Development ordinance,
it is concluded that the public purpose requiring the piping of the
Ridenbaugh Canal, the Eight -Mile Lateral, and the Nine -Mile Lateral
will not be served.
12. That it is concluded the Application for a block length
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAST - PACE 5
VARIANCE - SHERBROOKE SUBDIVISIONWESTPARK Co. INC.
variance and a variance from the piping requirements be granted.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby approve
these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN MORROW
COUNCILMAN TOLSMA t
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY.: -.I
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER)
DECISION
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED_
VOTED
That it is decided the variance for a block length of greater
length than 1000 feet and a variance for piping of the Ridenbaugh
Canal' Eight -Mile Lateral and Nine -Mile Drain in Sherbrooke Hollow
Subdivision is granted.
DISAPPROVED:
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - PAGE 7
VARIANCE -- SHERBROOKE SUBDIVISIONIWESTPARK CO. INC.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN THE
NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 4r TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,
RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE a
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of
Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of
said City to annex to the said City real property which is
described in Section 1 below:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council
of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho.
Section 1. That the real property described as:
A parcel of land lying in the Northeast 1/4 of the
Southeast 1/4 of Section 4, T. 3N., R. 1W., B.M.. Ada
County, Idaho and more particularly described as follows.
Commencing at the East 1/4 corner of Section 4, T. 3N.,
R. 1W., B.M. the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING*
Thence S 0 0 ° 38 ' 011' W 1,175.76 feet along the line common to
Sections 3 and 4 to a point;
Thence N 8 9 * 19 ' 2 3 " W 1.3 2 3.4 0 feet to a point on the west line
of the NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4;
Thence N 0 0 ° 41 f 4 8 " E 1,,174-79 feet to the northwest corner of
said NE 1/4 of the SE 1/4►
Thence S 89021'55" E 11322.11 feet to the REAL POINT OF
BEGINNING of this description;
Said parcel of land containing 35.59 acres, more or less,
is "hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4
Residential; that the reason for the R-4 zoning is to allow
development for a single family residential subdivisor ic�kQ�Irlo
p g y .
e f
as Turnberry Subdivision; that the annexation and zo ing:i su sect
t � ;j �j F
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE TURNBERRY SUBDIVISIONI
BENCHMARK LAND CO. PAGE 1Ilia
...
sk9 7 �0 P P).. 5
FE :_ : �
to the conditions ref erenced in the Findings of Fact and
Conclusions of Law as adopted by the Meridian Council; that all
ditches, canals and waterways shall be tiled including those that
are property boundaries or only partially located on the property.
Section 2. That the property shall be subject to deem
annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements:
a. That the Applicant will be required to connect to
Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and
sewer mains will serve the land.
be That the development of the property shall be subject to
and controlled by the Subdivision and Development
Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan adopted
January 4, 1994.
C* That, as a condition of annexation and rezoning, the
Applicant shall be required to enter into a development
agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D;
that the development agreement shall address inclusion
into the development the requirements of 11-x9--605 of the
Revised and Compiled ordinances of the City of Meridian
and other matters; that the property may be de --annexed if
the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement are
not satisfied.
d* That the development of annexed land must meet and comply
with the Ordinances of the city of Meridian and in
particular section 11-9--615, which pertains to
development time schedules and requirements, 11-9-505 Me
which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways,
and 11-9--506 B 14. which pertains to pressurized
irrigation.
e. That in regard to landscaping, the Applicant must meet or
exceed the promised level of lands aping, including the
buffering, open areas, type of and density of
landscaping, and walks depicted on the site plan as
demonstrated at the August 12, 1997 public hearing on the
annexation application.
f. That approval of this application continues to be
contingent upon the City of Meridian's ability to accept
the additional sanitary sewage generated by the proposed
development. Applicant will be responsible to construct
the sewer mains to and through the proposed development.
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION\
BENCHMARK LAND CC. - PACE 2
The subdivision designer must coordinate main sizing and
routing with the Public Works Department . Sewer manholes
must also be provided to keep the sewer lines on the
south and west sides of centerline.
g. That the Applicant must, as agreed, build crossings at
the west ends of Tournament and Classic Drives, as well
as the south end of O'Conner Way, when the property to
the west is developed. Also, the Applicant must,, as
agreed, continue fencing across the stub streets, and
stub sewer and water to the subdivision boundary at these
locations.
h. That these conditions shall, run with the land and bind
the Applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns.
i. That the .Applicant shall meet the requirements and
conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
and meet the Ordinances of the City of Meridian.
Section 3* That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of
the legal description, and map, which shall plainly and clearly
designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada
County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission
within ten (1D) days following the effective date of this
Ordinance.
Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: There being an emergency,
which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this Ordinance shall
be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval
as required by law.
.ANNEXATION ORDINANCE -- TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION\
BENCHMARK LAND CO. - PAGE 3
PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this day of October,
199?.
APPROVED:
ROBERT Do CORRIE
ATTEST:0�u NI,
��ti �►,�
�,..�
..- ..
SFAfAW
iae� a aAW
,.
C TY CLERK �-" WILLI G • BERGr JR. '�� "�" r ,,$
STATE OF IDAHO,}
ss.
County of Ada, )
I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk of the City of Meridian,
Aida County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing
is a true, full and correct copy of an Amended Ordinance entitled
"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND DYING IN THE
NORTHEAST 114 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1%4 OF SECTION 4r 'TOWNSHIP 3 NORTHr
RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTYr IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE "r passed as Ordinance No. r b the City
Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the 4- day of
October, 1997, as the same appears in my office.
DATED th* m �JIrGN�day of October.. 1997.
1%p
+` A
sm ft*
City Clerk, City o M idian
Ada County, Idaho
y
1 6F
�%��
ANNEXATION -0 10 BERRY SUBDIVI S ION\
BENCHMARK`..E 4
STATE OF IDAHO , y
ss.
County of Ada, i
On this da of October, 1997 before me the
� r r r
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally
appeared WILLIAM C. BERG, JR., known to me to be the person whose
name is subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged that he executed the same,
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my
official seal the day and year in this certificate first above
written.
�+����rrri�rrrrrrr��
.` L �•
SEAL 01 A low
go
0.01
w �
r+ a
w
ft
rres.F
Public for -rdaho
ng at Meridian, Idaho
mission expires
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - TURNBERRY SUBDIVISION\
.-:BENCHMARK LAND CO. - PAGE 5
Z •j
t
r
--------------------..______------__-_--_ _ _ __---__ ------------__--___
---- -
-----
-----------�_*.- �_...__---------________--_- -L ---�-- ---- - -- - - -- - �-: -
t
oRnrrrArrcE xo. 7 7(3
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING AND CHANGING THE
ZONING OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN WHICH IS
GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS A 1.0 0 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST
1/4, NORTHEAST 1/4t NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 13F TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,
RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE*
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of
Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of
said City to change the zoning from R-15 Medium Haigh Density
Residential to R-40 High Density Residential, for the following
described parcel in Section 1 below:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council
of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho:
Section 1. That the aforementioned real property which is
described as follows:
A 1.00 acre parcel located in the SE 1/4, WE 1/4, WE 1/4,
Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian,
Ada County, Idaho, more particularly described as follows:
i
F
Beginning at the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4,
Northeast 1 / 4 of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 1 West,
Boise'Meridian, Meridian, Ada County, Idaho;
thence North 35.8 feet along the section line (the
centerline of S. Meridian Street) to ap oint*
thence North 894 41' West 25.00 feet to a point;
thence North 120.00 feet along the west side of said Meridian
street to a point, the real point of beginning*
0
�i 9 00
thence North 89* 41 ' West 363.00 feet along the north side of
record of survey No. 3497 whose , bearing is North 89* 18 ' 251,
West 363.00 feet (even though these bearizncfs a re r''d �f fAir nt ,
the angles & distances remain the same) to. a-., �-•pc?in�FV�
thence North 120-00 feet to aoint
�
p
QFJ
RE Z ONE ORDINANCE LEE CENTERS -- PAGE 1O
� � � � Fri
970
thence South 89° 411 East 363.08 feet to a point;
thence south 120.00 feet to a point, the real point of
beginning.
Said parcel containing 1.08 acres, more or less,
be, and the same is hereby rezoned from R--15 Medium High Density
Residential District to R-48 High Density Residential Distract and
Section 11-2-425, Official Zoning Maps, is hereby amended to
reflect the same. This rezoning is subject to the conditions
referenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as
adopted by the Meridian City Council on the request for rezone,
and even though the property is zoned R-40, no more than three (3)
structures with a total of sixteen (16) units shall be constructed
on the property as designated in the application of rezone.
Section 2. The Applicant shall comply with all of the
Ordinances of the City of Meridian including the Fire Code, Life
Safety Code, the Uniform Building, Electrical, Plumbing Codes and
all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. That the Applicant
shall enter into a Development Agreement and/or the property shall
be developed under the conditional use permit process.
Section 3. That if the Applicant shall fail to meet the
above conditions the property shall be subject to rezone back to
R-150
Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: There being an emergency,
which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this Ordinance shall
be in full force and effect from and after its passage and
approval as required by law.
REZONE ORDINANCE -- LEE CENTERS - PAGE 2
PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this day of October,
1997.
RO
R; � ROBE S p . CORR I E
OF
ATTES :'1�.
t
,
nTY,_:...CLERK. WILLI BERG, JR* SEAL
r �
1'k
STATE OF IDAHO ,
County -of Aida .�'������� - � t"oN�`��
If WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk of the City of Meridian,
Ada County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing
is a true, full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled "AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING AND CHANGING THE ZONING
OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN WHICH IS
GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS A 1. D a ACRE PARCEL LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST
114. NORTHEAST 1/4, NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 13r TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH,
RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE"; passed as Ordinance No* 7 , by the City
Coun it ^ and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the Z I day of
19 9 7, as the same appears in my of f ice*
DATED } of ��` , 1997 .
F Ci Clerk City of Aedian
wSEAL
Ada County, Idaho
-►
STATE OF 1600
County • of Ada 'f 'flit s t1jil
On this f day of 044er 1997, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally
appeared William G. Berg, Jr., known to me to be the person whose
name is subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged that he executed the same.
REZONE ORDINANCE - LEE CENTERS - PAGE 3
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
my official seal the day and year in this certificate first move
written.
SEAL
N ar Public' for Idaho
�►►� oQ������ ��
R si. ng at Meridian, Idaho
A tfe �
REZONE ORDINANCE LEE CENTERS PAGE 4