Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 05-07MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY 7, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 1996: (APPROVED) SWEAR IN TWO NEW POLICE OFFICERS: DAVID HOFMANN & RICHARD SHADDUCK MICHAEL CASSEN: PRESENTATION OF CITY SEAL: (TABLED UNTIL MAY 21, 1996) 2. TABLED APRIL 2, 1996: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING UTNIL JULY 16, 1996) 3. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: PRELIMINARY. PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO.5 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: DISCUSSION OF REQUIREMENTS IN FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: (TABLED UNTIL JUNE 4, 1996) 4. TABLED APRIL 16, 1.996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY DAVE LEADER: (APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS) 5. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY ANGELA MILLER: (APPROVE AMENDED FINDINGS; APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) 6. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: ROD CULLIP: REQUEST FOR SEWER HOOK-UP: (DENIED AT THE CITY'S EXPENSE) 7. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: AVEST PLAZA LANDSCAPING: (APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS) 8. FINAL PLAT: FIELDSTONE MEADOWS NO.5 SUBDIVISION BY GARY VOIGT: (TABLED UNTIL JUNE 4, 1996) 9. FINAL PLAT: HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO.5 BY INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT: (APPROVED) 10. FINAL PLAT: BEDFORD PLACE SUBDIVISION NO.2 BY BRIGHTON CORP.: (APPROVED) 11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A LEARNIN(,r -ENTER FOR 50 STUDENTS BY i __ .LSTREAM PROP.: (APPROV~~ FF/CL; APPROVE CONDITIONAL t~SE PERMIT) 12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY CRYSTAL MARTINEZ: (APPROVE AMENDED FF/CL; APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A TRANSFER OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FROM KIDZ CONNECTION TO CHILDREN'S UNIQUE STYLE: (APPROVE TRANSFER) 14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RAILSIDE SUBDIVISION BY RON YANKE: (APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS) 15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION REQUIREMENT FOR RAILSIDE SUBDIVISION BY RON YANKE: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PORKY PARK NO. 1 SUBDIVISION BY RON VAN AUKER: (TABLED UNTIL MAY 21, 1996) 17. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 14 ACRES TO I-L FOR OLSON-BUSH NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY R-2 DEVELOPMENT (APPROVED FINDINGS; CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE ORDINANCE) 18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OLSON- BUSH NO.2 SUBDIVISION BY R-2 DEVELOPMENT: (APPROVED) 19. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BALLANTYNE TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK BY JIM BALLANTYNE: (CONTINE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL MAY 21, 1996) 20. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR BALLANTYNE-TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK BY JIM BALLANTYNE; TABLED MARCH 5, 1996) (TABLED UNTIL MAY 21, 1996) 21. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SPORTSMAN POINTE N0.5: (TABLED UNTIL MAY 21, 1996) 22. NON-DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR GOLFVIEW ESTATES NO. 4 & 5: (APPROVED) 23. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON ANGEL PARK DEVELOPMENT: (APPROVE ONE YEAR EXTENSION) MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MAY 7. 1996 The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Robert D. Corrie at 7:30 P.M.: MEMBERS PRESENT: Walt Morrow, Glenn Bentley, Charles Rountree, Ron Tolsma: OTHER PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Chief Gordon, Jim Johnson, Walter Casey, Angela Miller, Wayne Forrey, Dale Newberry, Mike & Janice Weavers, Steven Jenkins, John Shipley, Charles Haacke, Lawrence Rackham, Kristen Kelly, David Hofman, Richard Shadduck, John Anderson, David Turnbull, Gene Smith, Dave Leader, Don Brian, Gary Lee, Rod Cullip, Tom Bauen, Dan Weatherby, Mary Cahoon, Crystal Martinez, Shirley Marino, Pat Nations, Brad Miller, Guy Valentine, Dave Roylance, Janette Fletcher: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 1996: Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the minutes of our previous meeting held April 16. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma that the minutes of the previous meeting held April 16 be approved, any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea SWEARING IN OF TWO NEW POLICE OFFICERS: DAVID HOFMANN AND RICHARD SHADDUCK: MAYOR GORRIE SWORE IN BOTH OF THE NEW POLICE OFFICERS, DAVID HOFMANN AND RICHARD SHADDUCK: ITEM #1: MICHAEL CASSEN: PRESENTATION OF CITY SEAL: Corrie: He was unable to attend the meeting tonight but will be here on the 21st, you have those Council just for your review. If you have any additions or reviews or anything you would like to see on that we will meet with him at the next meeting on the 21st. Counselor do we need that to be tabled since it is an agenda item? Crookston: That would be appropriate. Morrow: So moved Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 2 Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we table the presentation of the City Seal, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED APRIL 2, 1996: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: Corrie: I think we have the request that be tabled to the June 4th meeting. Crookston: Mr. Mayor, regarding that variance the Council had asked me to get in touch with Nampa Meridian, John Anderson is here from Nampa Meridian. I would Like to have him make is presentation as to what Nampa and Meridian Irrigation District does when the City of Meridian or another City or anybody if they the a ditch what happens to it. The question came up last time as to whether or not the easement if there is one has to be fenced and a gravel road placed on it. I think the question needs to be answered, Mr. Anderson is here, I think the Council may desire to have his statements put into the findings of fact and conclusions of law. If the Council decides to do that we need to then re-open the public hearing to have Mr. Anderson's statements included and to have new notices published so that anybody else can come forward with additional evidence. Corrie: Council, any discussion or desires at this point? Morrow: My desire would be to hear Mr. Anderson's comments. Rountree: Do we need to reopen the public hearing? Crookston: I think that would be appropriate to open it now, it was, the hearing was closed when the applicant ceased his presentation of evidence and the Council decided to close it and have findings prepared. Morrow: I would move to reopen the public hearing to have John Anderson of Nampa Meridian Irrigation offer information with respect to the requirements to cover the ditch. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to reopen the public hearing for findings of fact and conclusions of law for a variance request, any discussion? All those • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 3 in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: I hereby open the public hearing for the findings of fact and conclusions of law for the variance request for Ashford Greens Subdivision by Brighton Corporation. Mr. Anderson? Anderson: I was hoping we could do a question and answer I could probably deal with that. a little bit better. Maybe I can fill you in, Mr. Crookston and I spoke on Monday on this. Corrie: Wayne would you swear him in please? John Anderson, was sworn by the City Attorney Anderson: The Nampa Meridian Irrigation .District has no policy requiring piping fortunately some of the City and County agencies do have that requirement and I think it makes everybody's life a lot easier. Over the past years we have tried several things, one being underneath parking lots we have tried it through back yards with license agreements stating nothing would go over our pipe lines. We have gates and can access it at any given time. We have a lot of those kinds of sections, it takes us awhile to get things right I guess. We started noticing more and more that in these back yard situations where we have a lateral or an easement and a license agreement and a legal document stating we have the right to still come in there when we do have problems it is near impossible. So what the district has gone to and it is not a matter of written policy but it is a policy it was discussed at a board meeting today is that if we are going to have facilities through back yards we are going to maintain either one of two ways with a gravel roadway along side it so no one can build over the top of it or that we have a fenced in area or an alley way if you will which may be a great place for bike pathways and I know you guys are liking those. We are seeing a little resistance towards that, the fact of the matter, I can site an example. Jackson Stub Drain, I worked with Gary Smith a number of years over here off of Locust Grove. As development occurred on the west side of Locust Grove Road I don't recall the name of the subdivision but they put in an 18 inch pipe in a drain that probably should have had a 24 inch pipe dausing a lot of flooding east of Locust Grove and a little bit on the west side. The City of Meridian requested that we dig it all up and put in larger pipe. We looked at the subdivision that had probably be in place for I don't know 10 or 15 years. Maybe, we made the offer to the City of Meridian if I can recall it correctly this is probably where I will get in trouble for lying but I think we offered to buy the pipe and repair it if the City of Meridian would clear the easement off for us. It didn't last for very long, they had you name it, patio slabs over the top of it, gazebos, just upstream two years ago within 3 months in a subdivision same direction, wd had manhole covers and we had • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 4 an easement agreement to have fence skirting around the subdivision we were supposed to be supplied with gates at every lot line and in that 24 inch pipe in the same drain we had a problem a plug up. We sent employees in there to find the gazebo over the top of a manhole, we got that moved, we got an employee down in the manhole with material to clean out this plug while he was in there the land owner came, out slid the manhole over the top of him, proceeded to lock the gate so our employee couldn't get out of the yard. Nobody got hurt and we got the job done and had some upset employees, but these type of examples is why we went to this policy. Our board is 100% behind that and in some situations we can get by without a roadway (inaudible) like the golf course for instance if they were, to pipe some of it. We need to still be able to course all the way through, I don't think something like a golf course is going to prevent that. We can still course down our easements if needed. You get into backyards, the fact of the matter is that those people they own the property and they want the right to enjoy it and we don't try to stop that. But we get you name it on top it, we get trees planted on top of it and then the roots grow in. So I guess at that point if I can answer any questions I would be more comfortable doing that. Crookston: I would just bring the Council up to date and just remind them this came up at a hearing and Mr. Turnbull and his engineer stated that in Bedford Place they had put in the the and they were required to put in a gravel road. I don't recall whether or not if there was required fencing, but the question of the Council was do we want to have and still require piping if there has to be a fence and or a gravel road. The Council wanted me to get in touch with Nampa Meridian and that is why Mr. Anderson is here and I appreciate his being here. I think that really what it amounts to is as I understood it what Nampa Meridian does is they determine whether or not, they determine whether a gravel road is necessary whether or not fencing is necessary, whether or not the placement of the ditch or the (inaudible) lateral that is piped where is it and what effect is it going to have on the lots within the area whether it be a subdivision or an open area. If it appears to Nampa Meridian that it could eventually cause problems in their gaining access then they require one or two of those items being the gravel road and the fence and the question to the City is do you want to have those areas still piped if that is going to be done because there is aesthetic problems with one or both of those ways to handle what is done after it is piped. Anderson: Can I address that subdivision (inaudible) they both run through front yards, the only requirement that we have is we would be able to come off of our muddy ditch banks on one end of the (inaudible) wet and muddy and we might not be able to turn off and' get back (inaudible) nice Kentucky bluegrass lawn (inaudible). We try not to do that but occasionally we have to deal with that. The largest facility we have in there is called the Finch lateral or it was commonly known as the South Slough a number of years ago. That facility can pick up a tremendous amount of drainage water and in that particular case we did not want to be cut off access to the head end of that pipeline if an emergency Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 5 (inaudible) the facility is buried through these front yards on that facility also end at a depth of about six feet. There again that is a real large facility there is no way we can actually shut it completely off so we need good accessibility because if it was flooding I can guarantee that everybody would want us in there repairing it. I don't think it would cause problems maybe it would ruin a few lot lines but we generally don't go out and put these ditches in after the subdivision has been there for a long time and we try what we can do to accommodate them. Crookston: Mr. Anderson, with regard to Ashford Greens application for a variance they requested a variance not to pipe the Safford Lateral and the fight Mile Lateral. They indicated that they each carry approximately 2100 to 2000 minor inches of water. The Gity has been allowing variances if there is sufficient evidence to state that it could be piped with a 48 inch pipe. There is some discussion as to, there was some discussion that if you use a concrete pipe it can handle more water ten I assume a corrugated pipe or plastic. Is there a difference as to how much water a concrete pipe can handle as opposed to any other type of pipe? Anderson: Yes, plastic pipe probably has the best flow characteristics, Gene Smith the engineer with Hubble he would be a better one to ask that. The concrete pipe is a little more resistant to homeowner malfunction, they usually can't run, put a fence in or dig a hole for a tree and use a big power auger they can go right through a plastic jgint and ruin real quickly. We have requirements that the depth of plastic pipe be no less than 36 inches of cover. We are now experience a lot of problems with the plastic pipe in so much as we have a contractor dig into them and they are not making the correct repairs. Twenty four inch ADS pipe has a repair band and sometimes maybe two of these at the cost of about $900. and the contractors that hit them don't mind repairing them but they don't want to repair them as we instruct them to or as the manufacturer requires. They want to come and pour a bunch of concrete out and we are sitting out here just hanging on the edge and we don't have this kind of problem with a concrete pipe so plastic pipe is only in specific applications in our system and we feel it is very well protected we will allow it. If it is not if it is going to go through common areas, (inaudible) we feel it may get hit and we are not going to allow them we will go strictly concrete. The two examples, the Safford and the fight Mile I am 99.9% sure that 48 inches is more than adequate and we do have an engineering firm, I missed a previous City Council meeting when the variance was given down stream on what is called the Cresson Lateral to pipe it. Same engineering firm said 48 inch pipe would not work just up stream and the Finch lateral 36 inch pipe was approved, same facility. I really felt bad about missing that meeting, I (inaudible) just a little bit late I believe it was 10:30 and I would have loved to have been here. If the District is willing to acxept the responsibility on these pipe sizes if we say it will work then we hope the Council supports that because we are going to take full responsibility on those flows. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 6 Crookston: What about corrugated metal pipe, do you allow that to be used? Anderson: Yes, specifically no less thana 10 gauge, all of these specifications that we have are based on life span. Our engineers feel that a 10 gauge probably has a 50 year plus life span. We don't want to see say for instance a 16/18 gauge pipe go in, we have seen it lasting 10 to 20 years and then it will rot out. Well who gets to pay for that, the taxpayers and all of us in this room. So we want to put some material that will lost the longest, get the most longevity out of it that is why our specifications are like that. We do lots of steel pipe, we do lots of concrete pipe. The cost wise, we were buying last year concrete pipe cheaper than we were buying plastic pipe for our own use. The steep pipe usually runs a little higher than concrete so generally people stay away from that. It doesn't have quite as good a seal ability depends on what kind of facility whether it is a (inaudible) how much pressure is on it (inaudible). So it really depends on the application and I know that sounds kind of wishy washy but we really look at what a facility is going to be like if we do allow a steel pipe (inaudible). Crookston: What does the district do or how does it determine how much impact it is going to have on the district. Let's say, I think as we discussed if it is going to be in the front yard let's say of lots you don't have as much problem with access because you can get to it. If the tiling is in the back yard that is where you have problems. How do you determine what the problems are going to be? Anderson: (Inaudible) we have been an irrigation district since 1904, the district, I certainly wasn't around back then. I personally have about 2p years with the irrigation district, I guess I could say I have seen almost everything. Everything that could be done on it. Our license agreements are legal agreements, they mean a lot if you want to go to court. Everybody can go hire and attorney and I will guarantee that is the first thing out of their mouths and we contend with that a lot so we try to bullet proof our system as best as possible. We worked with the City of Meridian as far as putting a lot of the sewer lines down our drainage and I thought that was a great idea because we probably both work real hard to keep those easements. If you needed to get to your sewer you could get to it and if we needed to get to our drainage facility we probably have double coverage there. But years of experience, and front yards we course most of our laterals on a daily basis, once a day and those front, yards we can see what they are doing. Most of the front yards have real restrictive covenants in their subdivisions, no fences, no trees and so far that they have to set back. One big worry that I have it getting too close to utilities, and I have seen gas lines, electrical lines going across them right over the top of our lines so we have to be real careful with that that we kind of get them parted out of corridor. We can live with them in there but not right on top of us it is too dangerous. Did I answer your question. Crookston: In the application for Ashford Greens for their variance the Safford Lateral as ~ ~ Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 7 I understand it would basically be between Golfview Estates which is the subdivision to the south and Ashford Greens. Do you anticipate that would be a problem in having that piped? Anderson: No, not a bit in fact I think everybody wins when they are piped. There are several factors, one is safety, in my 20 years I have probably been on that many drownings and I think piping offers tremendous amount of safety to the community. Number two is you get seepage naturally, it leaks out of there, you guys are going to hear about, we hear about it all the time. We spent half a million dollars of district tax payers money this last tiling the ditch that sits up above Costco down by the mall, we have a ditch that runs the rim of that. We continued on down past Maple Grove in Maple Hills Estates because I road that when it was still being farmed, even when it was being farmed we had water next door. They built those homes so close to those back fences those people go out and mow their lawns and practically need pontoon boats to do it. It has been a problem to do it since day one. Our board finally said we are tired of hearing that but who .suffers it is the taxpayers. We are not a private corporation, we are like a city or any other quasi- municipality. We charge to get that stuff prepared and there is a tremendous amount of benefits for that for everyone. Crookston: The same question with the Eight Mile Lateral, do you know where that runs? It would cross, it runs through the golf course where the golf course is now and then it would run through some of the new land that is intended to ultimately be part of the golf course and is also going to be run through part of land that is going to be part of a subdivision. It is going to run somewhat north or south to north I assume in a portion of that subdivision. Have you seen the plans for Ashford Greens Subdivision? Anderson: Maybe, I see a lot of plans, I travel from east to Boise to west to Lake Lowell, I see a lot of plans. I know I met preliminary out on site with the developers, I am just not (inaudible) I can't say. But (inaudible) you get seepage from these facilities you have the safety factor, it is just an all around benefit cost wise. t know the developers really spend a lot of money doing that. The district has extended and laid pipe for several developers, we did it in Elk Run. The developers supplied all of the materials the district used its labor and machinery to put in the pipe. We also did it in Johnson's development over here off of Linder Road, The Landing. We laid 48 inch pipe in there (inaudible) so I think we can do some things to help share cost in that. We try to set up so many of those a year, as many as we can do with our other work to help that flow smoother. Morrow: I have a question, what you are indicating to us is there is not going to be a consistent policy of whether it would be plastic, concrete or metal in terms of a guideline or whether it was going to be covered and have a graveled roadway over it or a fence over it. We are going to see those on a case by case basis is that correct. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 8 • Anderson: I would like to see a policy in place that would help you guys so you would understand it better. But like I say you have a big difference, you have a subdivision (inaudible) golf course. Two very different facilities, the golf course we can get out easily, we are not going to be stopped. Put that same setting in a back yard it is a little bit different. As far as the pipe goes I would say we are going to hold pretty tight to concrete for the most part. It is probably going to be only under special board approval is what I have spoke with the board in order to get a variance for waiver from that. As far as the steel pipe, the corrugated metal pipe that depends on how much back pressure we have on a pipe, these pipes are not designed to take much of a head, it will just squirt out the sides, if you are familiar with that. If you have a nice level or down hill application steel pipe wold probably work fine. Or ditches run in all sorts of fashions, some of them (inaudible) Ridenbaugh Canal uphill at Maple Grove because it is sure higher up on the ridge when you get a mile away from them when when it starts to be. So every ditch is different, it has, I think it will be pretty consistent with what we do. There is some kind of policy if you guys want to help us develop. What would make you help understand what we are doing I would be happy to sit down- with Gary and get that. Morrow: I think part of my concern is that no only do we but our staff and the development community need to have some sort of feel going into the situation what may be required. That is difficult if it is not a standard policy. Anderson: Well our policies range from time to time. This is a pretty new 3 or 4 months old. I can see if we can get something in witting if it would make it easier for you. If it goes in the back yard I think we are going to stay consistent with, you know developers choice they say they don't want to put fences up on both sides. I like that approach because it is an alley way and kind of a no man's land. the people buy the home they know what they have got and they know they are not going to be back in there planting a garden or putting in a hot tub in there, it is real simple they can see that. If we put a gravel road in there we are going to maintain it, we are probably going to keep it sterile we are going to let him know we don't want them growing a garden in there because we have torn a few of them out and it is no fun. No matter what you do it is still no fun. I will try to get something in writing. I have just had my board meeting today and the other one is two weeks off maybe I can come over and sit down with Gary and see what will help you. Rountree: You indicated you would maintain your gravel road in that situation how about any dirt that would be in .between fences and growing weeds? Anderson: Well one of the things that we are going to try this fall that we have never tried in the past is we are going to try to get into some (inaudible) grasses along our easements where they are not gravel but we have piped areas that are already fenced in. We may go to something like that but we want to get a definite defined area. I think if it was truly going Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 9 to be in somebody's back yard and we are going to say no gates back through there they would probably fence it off anyway because nobody wants and open back yard. It would be a great opportunity, once again like I said I know we have worked with the City as far as bike paths fill that into your plan. I think our board, I can't speak for them but I think if our ditches were piped I think that would be a great place for bike paths because I think we can close them down and work on them when ever we needed to and the public would use them and we would have no danger whatsoever. Crookston: How much maintenance do you have when either a lateral or drain ditch is tiled? Anderson: How much maintenance? Well it depends, I just purchased another used mower to mow our right of ways because we are getting so much demand for keeping the weeds and things down. We do spray. It depends on whether or not they have any problems, some of them we have zero, absolutely none. That would be the most optimum but we have had pipe lines in the ground for almost 20 years and all of the sudden for some reason, when they used aluminum pipe a lot 20 years ago they used a heat melt on band and they are deteriorating and falling apart and we have to go in and fix those. In some cases we don't even know what we have underground out there. We didn't put it in the developers did and some of them were mavericks and some of them just did it in the winter, we maintain 400 to 600 miles of canals, laterals and drains (inaudible) we can't stay on top of it I am sure like any other organization, we try to do the best we can. Probably would just be mowing, if it is was a gravel .roadway and we were going to keep it sterile it would be spraying it once or twice a year. We have probably 90% of our system still an open system so I guess I can't answer that very well. Crookston: There is no problem with having turf over something that is piped is there, grass? Anderson: If it were open, see everybody buys their home and everybody wants to throw a fence up and a gate. I think we are back to the same problem, if it were a maintained corridor like a bike path then turf would work fine. But my experience has been well somebody says can't we plant some grass back there and the next thing they have a garden and the next they have trees back there or strawberries or rose bushes or some kind of berry bushes and it starts all over again. I think it really needs to be well defined, we have areas where they are maintained in little parkways out off of Victory Road, our Farmers lateral is going to be a sidewalk along side of it and it is all a grass area and is maintained by the homeowners association. I think that is great, if we have to get in there we roll up on the sidewalk. The biggest problem is if we do have to got through there and somebody is irrigating or sprinkling or whatever our trucks are going to leave big impressions. There again people love their yards they are going to come and say we want • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 10 it fixed, we want it repaired and we don't want a bunch of bad neighbors out there. Like I said we are just trying to bullet proof what we have and make it easy on everybody in the long run. Crookston If you had, have you ever granted a license agreement to a homeowners association to maintain either the ditch or the if it were tiled the area-above the ditch? Anderson: We didn't have a license agreement, we did have a few verbal agreements. When I road ditch, there as an area called the Crawford lateral, it lasted for about 5 years, they did a beautiful job, new people moved in with new idea from all over the country and then they got railroad ties and rocks and the weeds were grown up and then they complained we pay our taxes get back here and maintain this. They go back and recover from what those land owners is quite expensive. There again you cause problems because sooner or later we had to go back in there and tear a bunch of things out to make that ditch run correctly. We had to start maintain the weeds again and we had some people do and some people don't and they had never worked out. There are several of those areas we have tried that. It is not working. Crookston: Those are all the questions that I have. Rountree: I have one more, given the front end costs of piping aside which is easier to maintain and which is efficient to maintain and open ditch or a closed ditch? Anderson: A closed ditch if installed correctly. Rountree: Have you ever been involved in a workshop or a situation where you had an opportunity to work with (inaudible) of the City of Meridian and a group of developers to try and resolve and come to some kind of a test case that we might put forth to address some of these issues. Both sides of thing and I can appreciate both, but we have to live together. Anderson: Absolutely, I would like to say daily, but weekly I get with developers. I would live to sit down at a workshop, I think that is great if somebody wants to put one together. We are rewriting our specifications right now given typical drawings of head walls and (inaudible) somebody said pass it around to all the engineering firms and let them comment on it before your board adopts it. I think they were trying to give me heart attack from laughing because we would probably come back with as many ideas as we have engineering firms Lucky Peak to west of Lake Lowell. I wouldn't mind if there were a group of developers and if they wanted to appoint one person to deal with that. If there was a couple of civil engineering organizations that wanted to review our comments and make suggestions maybe we could live with that and we are not that (inaudible). We do Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 11 • know about maintaining them how much room, that has always been a problem. I tried on some of our easements leaving an open roadway on one side and let the developers pipe (inaudible) fence right over to the edge within 2 or 3 feet and they said you don't need both sides. So I tried several of those types of things. What happens is you end up with grass on one side that we can't to and if you spray them they call our friends at the department of agricultural and tell them we are trying to kill their dogs or kids. They tell us to go get sized and besides from that we have too large a system and not a big enough budget to hire people to manually do that. I can get to them I have machinery that can take care of those kinds of things. You bet I would love to sit down in a small group. I know there is a building counsel or a developers council they appoint a few people. There are plenty of engineering firms, I don't even care who (inaudible) let's sit down and talk that would be great. Rountree: Thank you. Corrie: Any further discussion? Thank you Mr. Anderson. Counselor, I have a question for you, we need to continue this until the May 21st meeting or June 4th Crookston: To allow notice to the populace we need to continue it to the June, first meeting in June. I think we need to open it up in case there is anybody here now as to whether or not they want to come forward and present anything. We have opened the hearing.' Corrie: Is there anybody from the public that would like to give testimony at this time for the open hearing? David Turnbull, 12426 W. Explorer Drive, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Turnbull: I just wanted to follow up on Councilman Rountree's question to John regarding some kind of workshop. I think that is kind of where t was directing my last testimony in the last meeting. Over the years we have developed some 4000 home sites in this valley and not once have w~ cut off anybody's irrigation water down stream to them. We know our obligation to get irrigation water to the downstream user. It has always been our intent and we have always used what we consider best engineering practices to accomplish that. But it seems to me we have dealt with a lot of irrigation districts and they have all got their different parameters, we have dealt with different municipalities and they all have their different parameters. The point I was trying to make at the time was maybe Meridian City's ordinance needs to be reviewed with some of these facts before us and work out a reasonable system where we are not just spending the maximum dollars for the least benefit but let's maximize this for everybody. John had given some testimony here that quite frankly I will probably digest a little bit and come bank with something in written form and maybe that is something we can discuss around a workshop type of an arrangement. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 12 • That is the comment that I made at the last testimony. I wasn't looking for a quick decision, I wanted the best decision and I wanted to create some kind of forum where this could come to a better resolution than I think it has been going lately. We have developed, we have done developments where we have open greenbelt waterways with bikepaths along them that stretch for a couple of miles and work real well. I will tell you what those laterals before we developed around them were overgrown with weeds and were maintain once over 10 years. They have never looked so good as they do now. So, I think there are probably some suggestions on both sides of the table where we can work together if everybody is willing to do that and I would like to see that. That is my whole point in bringing up the issue in the first place. So, I would like to follow up on Councilman Rountree's suggestion and put something together in that regard. Morrow: I think I would like to offer this, it is obvious that with the change in Nampa Meridian we need to really look at what our policy and ordinance states because it seems to me now that there needs to be a little bit more flexibility. I think that it makes a certain amount of sense to develop some method to be able to determine what it is is going to be required from each project. So I would favor a round table or a committee or whatever to kid of begin to work with these issues. Tumbull: Once again I stated in the last meeting, Mr. Mayor, that we are not, we are fine on tabling this decision for some. We are developing certain parts of Ashford Greens immediately but they have not they are not impacted, they are not adjacent to these laterals that are in question now. I think as I said before it might be a couple of years before we get to those maybe a year and a half or maybe two years before we get to those areas in the development. I know we talked about a deferral to June 4th, if you want to defer it beyond that it is acceptable to us. I would rather take the requisite time and see a positive outcome to this vVhole situation. Bentley: I have a question, you spoke with some of the places you did open ditches with bike paths, what size ditches were these? Turnbull: Similar size to what these are. Bentley: Did you have to fence them off? Tumbull: No, there is one that Hans through the Hobble Creek Subdivision, Eagle Road to Cloverdale Road through Hobble Creek and Boise Research Center. Part of it is under construction now about half is completed and the other half is under construction. Rountree: I think you have got us close to where you want us and you have indicated that you probably are looking at a couple years (inaudible) variance (inaudible) on this Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 13 • particular subdivision. I would suggest that maybe we either table this item or act on this item in terms of the findings of fact that would address the putting together of a committee to review (inaudible) Nampa Meridian Irrigation's policy with respect to tiling ditches. With input from the public and work with the development community in fashioning that. Either that or just leaving this item tabled indefinitely and I don't know that sits well with Council. It would be hard to pick a day certain in which to have a finding. Turnbull: Mr. Mayor and Mr. Rountree, I don't necessarily want it to go out 2 years but 6 months time I would think we ought to be able to pull together those workshops and complete them and come to some sort of resolution. Corrie: Any further discussion? (Discussion Inaudible) Corrie: Thank you David, anybody else from the public that would like to bring testimony at this time? Gene Smith, 9550 Bethel Court, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Smith: Mr. Mayor and members of the Council I would just like to make one point and Mr. Anderson referred to it a little bit on the Cresson lateral. As some of your will recall I was before you at several of those meetings discussing the Cresson Lateral. It puts the engineering community in kind of a tough position because we are required to certify and guarantee basically that a certain size pipe will carry flow that Nampa Meridian is putting down that ditch. When I am given the flow from Nampa Meridian and they say it will fit in a 48 inch pipe and I am saying no it won't because I am not going to stamp it and they tum around and will not take the responsibility should anything flood out, I am certain not going to take that responsibility. We need to somehow structure in there that if Nampa Meridian says that flow will fit into a 48 inch pipe then they need to take the responsibility should anything happen in the future. Rountree: Could that be handled by a certification by the district either that or have their engineer stamp the plans. Smith: That would be great as a matter of fact I requested that on the Cresson lateral and it was not provided. Rountree: Has their (inaudible) Smith: I don't know what reason, I could not get it. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 14 • Corrie: Anybody else have any other questions? Anybody else from the public that would like to enter testimony at this time? Council, discussion? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I think that what I would like to see happen is that we have findings that were approved that basically came to no decision. I think that I would like us to do something with that and then at the same time defer Mr. Turnbull's project tong enough to put together a committee and to begin study and resolution of this issue. So I guess what I want to do is ask Counselor's advice on how we specifically deal with this set of findings is a no decision set of findings. Crookston: Well the first thing that I believe the Council needs to do is we need to set a date for additional testimony so that is published in the newspaper so that other people have an opportunity to come forward if they desire. Then we can address the findings after that is done so that not only can we address in the findings what was submitted tonight but in the additional testimony (End of Tape) addressing whatever you want to. You would need to revoke your approval of those findings and have new findings prepared. But I think where the Council is heading is that you may want to have the workshop or whatever you are thinking of done and then have the additional public hearing at that time after you have held your workshops so that people can then testify again. I think you could have the hearing on June 4th but you may also have to have another public hearing after that after you have your workshop you have people come forward, have presentations after the workshops are done. Rountree: I don't understand the advantage of leaving this hearing open for this particular item and (inaudible) it would seem to that if we have public input or request public input then it be on the issue of Meridian's ordinance for tiling ditches and or Nampa Meridian Irrigations policy related to that. Crookston: The reason that you need to leave this hearing open is so that the public has an additional opportunity. We may get no additional testimony but we have to give the publican opportunity we have to publish notice so that they can come forward just as Mr. Anderson has, Mr. Smith and Mr. Turnbull. If somebody else wants to give testimony we have to give them notice that they have the opportunity to do that. Corrie: I think Council after that June 4th meeting you can close the public hearing at that time and go with what you are asking for at that point. But we do need to continue it. Morrow: Let me ask, by attacking it from another angle, and I think what you are saying here counselor is that the only reason for continuing or tabling would be to make a decision whether we wish to have new findings and facts and conclusions drawn and it seems to me that having new findings of fact and conclusions drawn would be predicated • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 15 • on whatever solution we came up with for this problem. So it seems to me to make more sense to table this until the July 16th or thereabouts to give us time to implement a committee to do the study and take advantage of any changes we might opt to make. At that point in time we do new findings based on what the policy or the ordinance restructuring is going to be. Crookston: I think that it is mandatory that we keep the hearing open for whatever length of time you want to deal with it. But we have to keep it open to allow any additional testimony if there is, there may not be any. But if you are going to have workshops and things of that nature to change the ordinance or to have additional facts on that I think that you still need to leave this hearing open so that you can receive testimony on those from the workshops. Morrow: And tabling keeps the hearing open is that correct? Crookston: That is correct. Morrow: I move we table until July 16. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded that we table the public hearing until July 16, 1996, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Crookston: Do you want a notice done for the July 16 meeting to give the public an opportunity to come forward? Corrie: I think you would have to counselor'? Morrow: We have to notice it but we don't have to make that decision until some time in June. Crookston: That would be true. Morrow: So let's make it in June when we see how we are progressing in terms of the study. ITEM #3: TABLED APRIL 2, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE N0. 5 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: DISCUSSION OF REQUIREMENTS IN Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 16 FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: • Corrie: You have in your packet Council a request that they also for reconsideration of the findings of fact and also for the preliminary plat to be tabled until June 4. Morrow: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that we table the preliminary plat until the June 4 meeting, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY DAVE LEADER: Morrow: Mr. Mayor, on a presentation that we have from staff, item 4 it says preliminary plat for Dove Meadows No. 2 by Dave Leader, comment is still remaining are the issues of the 20 foot planting strip requirement on Hickory, progress in tiling of the ditch along the northern boundary and the landscaping and irrigation. We have not received any additional information, could we have, as I recall the reason for tabling was those four items and the resolution of those. Shari you are indicating that there has been no progress made on the part of the applicant on all of those four items. Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council I am not aware of the progress if there has been any made. I know they were talking about tiling that ditch in cooperation with Wingate Subdivision but I still think that is an issue that needs to be taken care of prior to approval. And to the irrigation, maybe their representative is here and could address some of those items. Morrow: Mr. Mayor that would be my preference. Cowie: Is there a representative, I think I saw Dave Leader here. Leader: I think there is a representative here I don't know where he is. Morrow: My question would be the four items that, when you were here last were as Shari alluded to is what has been the resolution of the ditch along the northerly boundary and the landscaping and irrigation issues and the 20 foot planting strip? • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 17 • Leader: Starting with the ditch along the northerly boundary, number 1 I don't think this is appropriate to the preliminary plat. This is an engineering matter, it was discussed, it was covered both with our engineers certified and they had a system that would work. It was approved for construction by your City Engineer as far as it being done. Nothing has been done we don't have a preliminary plat approved yet. We are not going ahead with any construction on this at least until we have a subdivision approved. There was never any indication in my mind or that I understood that the ditch was supposed to be constructed or tiled before the subdivision was done. Morrow: As I recall the issue there Dave is that of commitment, if memory serves me the presentation at the last meeting concerning that ditch was somewhat iffy. Shari can you comment on that for me please? Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council this ditch has been a problem since the initial annexation. It never was solved in part of phase one even though it was not in phase one. I guess my problem is waiting for things to happen that have been promised to happen and nothing does happen. Mr. Brian, I don't know if he could shed any light on what is going on. He is in the back of the room there he is nodding his head indicating he has a comment. Leader: Could I make two comments on that, one I think Mr. Brian's problem never related to the lack of delivery of irrigation water. His problem was a complaint about too much water which had to do with wastewater that went down the ditch that was on my northern boundary. Since Avest developed that ditch that was adjacent to that drainage ditch that went adjacent to his property I believe no longer goes that route. The wastewater still goes where it always went at least at the present time, long terms I guess that is going to go somewhere else. Again the delivery of irrigation water to his property does not go through my property at all. If we construct this ditch and that is the plan with Wingate, we construct this pipe which would put that delivery of that water through our pipe. But because of the subdivision being held up we went in and re-ditched our ditches, we relocated the ditch further south so it was out of the way of building this line when the time came to build it. There was one other thing that first came up in this hearing and that was an agreement that I think Mr. Brian had that had to do with tiling the ditches. That agreement was never executed, that agreement was incorrect it is the reason it was never executed because it referred a ditch on the northern boundary when it should have referred to a ditch on the southern boundary of Dove Meadows No. 1 and 2. Morrow: I guess my question here is according to my notes from our last meeting, do we has a City have anything in writing that indicates that the partnership if you will between Wingate and yourself specifically spelling out what is going on? • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 18 ~~ Leader: Not that I am aware of, Gary Lee is here this evening, he is the engineer for Wingate. He may be able to add some light or shed some light on this. My assumption is that either Wingate has to build their own ditch through their property or we have to jointly agree to build this together which verbally we have done. We don't have anything in writing but my assumption is either we build one ditch or we build two ditches. Morrow: I think what we has a Council are waiting to see is a resolution of that so that we know when the preliminary plat is approved exactly what is going to happen. Leader: Well again Walt I believe we are getting things out of order here because normally we don't have final engineering on a preliminary plat stage. Now we do in this case and our engineering calls for one ditch and Wingate's plan called for a ditch on their property. But, we combined these to eliminate problems to add efficiency into one and your City Engineer looked at it and approved the plans. Morrow: I guess what I would like to see then for the City and its citizens is a letter from you signed by both you and Wingate agreeing to whatever the ditch plan is going to be. So that when we approve the preliminary plat we can say that this is a resolution to the problem and these folks have agreed to this. My suspicion is here that is kind of what we were looking for from the last time and we are not seeing that. Leader: I can't agree to something when I don't even have the preliminary plat, I don't know at this point if I will ever build Dove Meadows NCB. 2 if I never have a preliminary plat. Morrow: I think the point Dave is tha# you get the preliminary plat approved when you have some sort of commitment that spells out to us as a City exactly what is going to happen. I think we as a City get into trouble on projects if we deal with a gray area. I think what we are asking from you and Wingate Subdivision is a letter showing that this is the method that you are going to solve the ditch dilemma and that is part of the package in terms of the presentation for the preliminary plat. It is a fairly simple thing to do but it does require commitment on your part to solving the problem in that manner. Leader: Again the construction plans for the final plat show one ditch and they show sizing of the correct size they handle all the water through one ditch and that is the plans that have been approved by your City Engineer. Morrow: Your comments counsel? Crookston: It is the preliminary plat that basically is controlling. Once the Council approves the preliminary plat that is what everything is controlled basically by. So that is the time • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 19 when that is being done, when things need to be set forth as to what is required. Leader: My comment to that normally at the preliminary plat stage you don't have final engineering that even sets out the size of pipe, that sets out exactly where the street drains to and those kinds of things. That is the reason you get a preliminary plat so you can spend the money to do the final plat. Now, if we went ahead and spent the money and did it and to me you are getting the cart before the horse. Crookston: I don't have any opinion whether it is the cart before the horse, that is what the courts have held. It is the preliminary plat that controls. Leader: What does it control final design? Crookston: No to my knowledge but whatever is approved in the preliminary plat either the developer can come back and say that is not the preliminary plat I don't have to do it. Or vice versa the City can say that was in the preliminary plat so you have to do it. Leader: I assume that you approve the preliminary plat with conditions, is that not the case? Crookston: I believe that can be done. Leader: And that certainly being a condition is well within your (inaudible) and certainly acceptable to me. But as I understand it you are talking about wanting me to build this before I even hive a plat approved. Morrow: That is not correct Mr. Leader, what I want to see is just simply a letter that commits both yourself and Dove Meadows and Wingate Subdivision to the concept. I am not asking for anything to be approved, I am sorry I am not asking for anything to be built in terms of before preliminary plat approval. I think what we are asking here on the conditions or the mason that this was tabled last time is that you had an opportunity to address those issues in writing and make those commitments. That is all it is is those commitments in terms of written. Leader: I am song I didn't understand that at all. Again I feel it is more appropriate for you to make that the condition for approval then for me to get written agreements that for something that isn't approved. Can we go onto the other issues here? Morrow: We can, please address the other ones. The twenty foot planting strip requirement on Hickory. ! • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 20 Leader: I think we did point out to Shari that Hickory Street is a 60 foot right of way, it is a 41 foot curb back to curb back which leaves public drive way of 9 1/2 feet between the back of curb and the property line. You put this 5 foot sidewalk at the curb that still leaves 41/2 feet of planting area with a 15 foot landscape lots you actually have a total of 19 1/2 feet of landscape area there still plus the sidewalk. To me again considering the acreage being the same as the highway and a 20 foot landscape strip is required I think that certainly the spirit of the concept 19 1/2 feet of landscaping is there. Questions there? Morrow: I don't have any questions for that. Leader: The pressurized irrigation system I talked to Gary Lee today, received a letter today from Nampa Meridian Irrigation District indicating that they have no problems with the location of the, which would be the common corner of Wingate No. 1, Dove Meadows and Packard No. 1 has a pumping station location. In talking with Gary Lee he indicated that it appeared to be the, there didn't appear to be any reason not to use that location that is what they were proceeding on that is the location of the common pumping station. And again the indication was that it would be turned over to Nampa Meridian to be designed and built to their standards (inaudible). Corrie: Further questions Mr. Morrow? Morrow: Yes, when does this become operational? Leader: That I don't know yet, the system is still not designed. Again my feeling is that is a final plat for all three subdivisions a consideration that has be addressed and answered before you can do a final on any of them. Morrow: I think what the Council as asking and certainly my fellow councilman can correct me if I am wrong but I think that what we were asking is that if your subdivision is the first one to be built does the pressurized irrigation system begin with those homeowners immediately and if so, is there a commitment to that. It does impact how we at the City use our water or our deep well water resources and I think that the concept of the three subdivisions using one common source is a new approach that we have not experienced before. I think there again what we were asking as a Council was is that we have some sort of commitment to the concept and then also for you to say. if you are going online with your subdivision first that pressurized irrigation system for your portion would be in place and that would be operational which would mean the pump station would have to be built. upfront. Leader: Again, certainly my assumption that the pumping station has to be built to service the first subdivision on line no matter which one comes on line first. As far as commitment • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 21 we have signed contracts and committed to pay the dollars to design and build this with (inaudible). Beyond that at preliminary plat stage certainly we don't have any problem entering into an agreement and the design and staging of that is dependent upon how many lots are coming on line at a given time. Morrow: But so far we at the City or our staff have no Leader: You have no final designs on that. Morrow: Nor do we have anything in writing in terms of how this concept is working and a commitment by Leader: No and there again though my feeling is that it obviously has to be a condition of plat approval that there is an agreement in place and it is built, that it is on line that the service lots when they come on line. Normally you bond for those things and they have to be completed within a certain time period, that is the way at least I understand things. Morrow: I think that is all true but I think that what the Council is asking is for something at the preliminary plat and as part of the original presentation for you to put in writing other than verbally put in writing so that it can be part of the approved preliminary plat. If nothing else it gives us an opportunity what it is we are buying whey we approve the preliminary plat. Leader: Again, I guess I don't have a problem with that other than it just seems like a more logical situation where you approve it and that is ,part of the approval and that is the condition of approval that there has to be pressurized irrigation. That is understanding we have to provide pressurized irrigation system, that is an absolute. If we are providing one jointly then that becomes our problem to work that out so that there is pressurized irrigation. Morrow: I have no more questions on that issue. Cowie: Any more questions of the Council? Thank you Leader: Was there another item or two? Rountree: Just those three. Cowie: Council do you wish to have Mr. Brian or Gary Lee answer any questions? Rountree: I would like to here from both. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 22 Corrie: Mr. Brian, I guess your name was mentioned first. Rountree: Any comments about the irrigation situation? Brian: Yes, I think maybe I can clarify a lot of things what is going on. I think Mr. Leader feels that he is being unduly picked on for some of the requirements. I think he has brought them all on himself. The ditch in question, he is right on a couple of accounts. He is right that the water that is in the ditch that you are requiring him to cover is not my water that is feeding me. My water that is feeding me is like he said was in one ditch that was buried on Wingate property. Mr. Wood who is developing Wingate took care of that and buried it. The ditch in question is the one that Mr. Leader rerouted and moved from 1 into phase 2 when he did phase 1. So when you did the first preliminary plat for the subdivision that ditch didn't appear on the plat because it wasn't there. It went around the east end of the property and out to Fairview or down through the middle somewhere. But he has rerouted back to the site that he is developing that is why they are a problem now. Avest development and their development of Fred Meyer and the Stor It facility and Dan Woods like I stated have taken care of my problems and I am getting more water and less flooding then I ever had before because of those two individuals. Mr. Leader I feel is personally responsible for flooding me out twice by rerouting, that ditch before. Any problems that he has now with burying that ditch he has created himself in my opinion. You are dealing with a ditch that wasn't on the preliminary plat. I can't remember what the other questions were regarding the ditch. At one time Mr. Wood and Mr. Leader were talking about incorporating that ditch into one pipe. I don't know what became of that whether that happened or not but nothing has been done. Mr. Wood like yourself wants a commitment from Mr. Leader from my understanding of talking to Mr. Woods to do that. Mr. Woods has only piped half of his subdivision ditch down to a certain point. He has not developed the lower half which would be the part that incorporate that ditch that is in question. I hope that clarifies a few things. Rountree: With that water from two ditches into one, does that create a waste water problem for you? Brian: Not now because Avest took care of that, they put a new box in and they are rerouting a lot of it where I have control over where it goes now. But like I say all of my problems have been taken care of by Avest and Woods. I think they have been taking care of Leader's problems for a couple of years too but that is my own personal opinion? Corrie: Any further questions? Gary Lee? Lee: My name is Gary Lee with JUB Engineers, it is true that we are working for Mr. Dave Leader and Mr. Dan Wood, Wingate Partnership and also Ted Sigmont with Packard No. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 23 1 and 2. They have entered into an engineering agreement to develop a set of design drawings for the pressurized irrigation system of those three developments. It is ongoing, we have got most of the pieces put together that we need to finalize the plans. We are doing that this week and next. So hopefully by the end of the week, next week we will have a final set of documents for submittal to the irrigation for review of final approval. We have met with the irrigation district on a number of occasions to discuss delivery problems and waste water problems and service areas and one thing and another and we have hit on all of those concerns and we have come to an agreement on how we are going to handle it. It is just a matter now of us getting our work done which we should have in a week to ten days. If you have any questions I would be glad to entertain those. Corrie: Councilman Morrow? Morrow: Mr. Lee I guess my question would be is that you said your work is progressing to the point that the three principles have agreed in terms of what the concept is. Is it unreasonable to ask for a commitment in writing to the concept from anyone of the three of those? Lee: Well I wouldn't think so, although the timing issue is obviously up for discussion but they have committed to us as a group. All three of them have signed separate contracts committing to the design work. Morrow: Thank you Corrie: Any further questions Council? Thank you Gary. Council, any discussion of the preliminary plat? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, from my perspective I still want to see those commitments in writing prior to my approving the preliminary plat. Certainly they can be conditions of approval but they are going to be conditions of approval in my mind even with the commitment in writing as part of the presentation for what it is we are getting along with that subdivision. So, that would be my feeling in terms of this matter, I would like fo hear what they other guys feelings as to what it is they think we ought to do. Rountree: Well possibly would have the same impact that consider approval upon receipt of a letter of commitment. I don't know what Counselor says about that. Morrow: That would by my next question Crookston: You can do it either way or you could approve it across the board, you could approve it i the two fashions which you have mentioned. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 24 Morrow: Your thoughts concerning the 20 foot planting strip as opposed to 19 foot six. Rountree: Pretty close, I don't have a problem with that. Corrie: Mr. Tolsma, any comment? Tolsma: (Inaudible) something in writing because there seems to be three people involved in the pump station. As far as the irrigation pipe line (inaudible) get all the parties involved so that everybody knows the rules of the game and hopefully the same rules. Bentley: I don't have a problem with the 19'6" planting strip but I too feel that since we are involved with three parties here on one universal project that we need some commitment on it. Corrie: Any further discussion? Entertain a motion. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the preliminary plat for Dove Meadows N0.2 subdivision subject to receipt of letters of commitment to the pressurized irrigation system and to the common ditch system between Mr. Dan Woods and Wingate Subdivision and Mr. Leader of Dove Meadows. On the pressurized irrigation I would like to see the letter of commitment from both of those principles and Ted Sigmont of Packard Subdivision. Rountree: Second Corrie: Heard the motion by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #5: TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY ANGELA MILLER: Angela Miller, 1285 Crestmont Drive, was sworn by the City Attorney. Miller: I am requesting a conditional use permit for a child day care in my home for up to 12 children. Corrie: Where is this day care center? Miller: In my home. • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 25 Corrie: The address? Miller: 1285 Crestmont Drive. Morrow: How many children will you have? Miller: Up to 12. Morrow: Let me ask you this, in your subdivision do the covenants and restrictions that discuss home businesses? Miller: Yes I have discussed that with the contractor and I have, there is a letter in there that he has agreed to have that business in the subdivision. Morrow: The contractor has agreed to it or other property owners have agreed to it? Miller: There iS a letter from the contractor because most of the subdivision has not been developed yet. Then there has been a public hearing and the neighbors have been made aware of it. As far as I know there has been no disagreements with it. Rountree: Have you received and read and thought about the findings of fact that were prepared by Planning and Zoning and do you have any comments about those. Miller: No, 1 have read them and I have no comments they look fine to me. Corrie: Further questions from Council? Morrow: I have none for her I have one for counselor. Corrie: Okay thank you, anybody else from the public that would like to give testimony at this hearing? Mr. Morrow, any other questions? Morrow: Yes, with reference to the letter I would like to have the counselor read it and comment on it please. Crookston: I don't see this as an objection whatsoever. Morrow: My question to you would be is that something that ought to be attached for the CC&R's of the subdivision so that potential- buyers are aware of that being an exception to the CC&R's? ~ ~ Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 26 Crookston: The City really doesn't have control of the property pursuant to the CC&R's. I think it is wise to make sure the people are informed of the uses that are there which may be in violation of the CC&R's but there is no responsibility for the City to make sure that there is compliance. Someone does not like it and they want to pursue their action under the CC&R's if the CC&R's prohibit the use they can certainly do it whether or not the City has approved it or not. Morrow: I understand that, my question is that the City approves the CC&R's as a condition of approval of the subdivision, having approved those CC&R's as written if we approve the usage of this as a day care center should we not also require that as a appendix to the CC&R's? Crookston: We never have before I don't think it would hurt to require that but there is no requirement that we do require that. I understand that but my concern here is that really the home buyer is put between a rock and a hard place from this standpoint, one is that we have some reasonable assurance in terms of the covenants and restrictions when they buy a lot within a subdivision or a house within the subdivision and that is how the subdivision is going to be operated. The City has approved those CC&R's and then a conditional use such as this the City turns around and approves tha usage within the subdivision that could people in the subdivision at odds with each other and we end up being the bad guy. So I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see if we are going to do this and that it is approved by the developer that this letter be attached to those CC&R's so that the buyer has that option at the time of purchase to be aware that is a legal use and he buys with that knowledge and not at some point in the future to come back to the City and say why did you approve this use when the CC&R's say there is not to be that use. I understand the civil remedies that he has, I think it is a philosophical question. Crookston: I agree, (inaudible) it is a real problem Councilman Morrow, the City does not have any responsibility to enforce the covenants. If there is a violation of the covenants the City has no (inaudible) some type of procedure to enjoin that violation. It is really up to the lot owners themselves as to whether they desire to enforce the covenants. But you raise a very reasonable question. The question however becomes do we have jurisdiction to ask for this addition to the CC&R's when we are not dealing with the land owner that adopted the covenants. I don't know that we have the authority to say we are going to require it. I think that would be nice to let the people know that this is there but I don't believe that the City has any responsibility to do that. Rountree: Didn't we have that requirement some years ago and the courts decided we couldn't do that. • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 27 Morrow: I think the issue there was, memory serves me, we were requiring the consent of 75% of the neighbors within 300 feet and some other things and I think what I am asking here is notification somewhere in the public record the average home buyer (End of Tape) Rountree: (Inaudible) to the CC&R's to allow those uses. I understand what you are saying because we are caught. Morrow: Well we end up being the bad guy here. Crookston: I think that you can request that the applicant notify the neighbors and you can request the applicant to send a letter to the people within 300 feet of the daycare. I don't think that we can say that the or require that the CC&R's be changed because the applicant is not the person who instituted the covenants. I think you can require her to inform the neighbors and do it if you desire periodically because you are dealing with the applicant. Bentley: The problem I see with that is how are you going to notify them if they are not there yet? They are going to be notified after the fact. Crookston: That is very true. Bentley: Then they have no real recourse then to put the far sale sign back up. Crookston: Or try and enforce the covenants. It is no doubt that it is a problem and Councilman Morrow is correct and I don't see that the City has any duty or responsibility other than to make this applicant do something about it. The developer of the subdivision is not before the City at this time and that is when we require the CC&R's. Rountree: I just don't see whatever remedy we propose would be effective in any case. Crookston: I think it is reasonable to inform the applicant if the City does approve it that does not prevent an existing owner or a future owner coming back and saying hey you can't do this it is violation of the covenants. Between that person that does not want a conditional use there and the applicant. Morrow: One final question, maybe in the future the issue is that in the covenants and restrictions be#ore they are approved by us for a particular subdivision there is some method in there to deal with this type of thing. Crookston: That could be done. • r Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 28 Morrow: So ultimately we have a solution to the problem, we don't have it in this particular case. Crookston: That is correct. Corrie: Any further discussion of the Council? Rountree: Is the hearing still open then? Corrie: Yes it is still open, are you ready to make a decision? Crookston: Have you asked for additional testimony? Rountree: We have seen a number of conditional use transfers for these kinds of facilities in the last few months. One thing that is obvious is the amount of use of water and sewer tends to be higher than we predicted. We have usually started these operations out as a resident I would suggest that we look at changing that and possibly a few times rate for sewer and water and I would also suggest that we also look at commercial rates for trash, it is a business. Corrie: Any further discussion from the Council? Morrow: I have none Corrie: I will close the public hearing. Rountree: I have a question for Council, Wayne if in a motion on this particular findings of fact that was approved by P & Z is it best to in the motion recommend additions, deletions or to request new findings of fact. Crookston :You can change the findings as you deem fit. Corrie: Do you have enough Mr. Counselor to do the findings of fact based upon the discussion tonight? Crookston: If you desire them to be changed yes. Morrow: I think we have a set of findings of fact before us I think that my interest in terms of adopting them to amend them to cover the two issues with respect to the water sewer and trash bill rates and then also to amend them to make the applicant aware of your terminology that approval does not preclude some citizen or some homeowner at future Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 29 time challenging the conditional use permit under the CC&R's. Rountree: Is that a motion? Morrow: It certainly is. Rountree: Second Corrie: This is for new findings of fact based upon what you are amended, (inaudible) you have heard the motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion on these? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: (Inaudible) approve the decision Morrow: Mr. Mayor I move we hereby adopt the conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the amended findings of fact and conclusions of law or similar conditions as found justified and appropriate by the City Council. And that the property be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code and other ordinances of the City of Meridian. The conditional use should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant from the City. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion? Roll Call Vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #6: TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: REQUEST FOR SEWER HOOKUP: Corrie: This is a continuation from the last meeting. Mr. Cullip, Council any questions? Crookston: Mr. Mayor it was my understanding that the sewer department was going to present something this evening on this matter, Gary are you aware of that? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, Bruce Freckleton had a video lined and dropped +f i Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 30 a note in your boxes to come by and view the video at your leisure and it was not brought into the Council chambers for viewing at this time. That is the video of the site prior to construction. I believe there was some film after the fact too. I think Mayor Corrie has viewed that. Crookston: Thank you that is what I understood. Rountree: Do you have any other updated information in addition to what was presented last evening? Smith: No, not if you have comments from our sewer inspector and from Rick Clinton, were those in your packet, they were written comments. Morrow: Those are the comments that we had at the last meeting, there have been no updates? Smith: I am not sure Mr. Councilman Morrow, I wasn't here at that meeting. Morrow: There have been no updated comments since the letter of April 16. Smith: I believe not, the only thing that has been done is a memo from Bruce Freckleton distributed for you to view the videos. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, for discussion I believe that there were remedies for this situation and I would recommend that we analyze that document to seek any remedies if there are any, there need to be. And not consider the sewer hook up as a remedy for this situation. Morrow: I a inclined to agree with that we sub-contracted to somebody to do the project within that contract there would be remedies for situations like this if there is a remedy to do it is up to the contractor to provide that remedy. I don't think that as a City we need to take the further step of doing the hook up which would not have ever been part of the remedy that was in the contract documents. Bentley: I would agree. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Cowie: I guess we need a motion now on Mr. Cullip's request. Cullip: May I make a comment on that? We had a meeting regarding all of the costs that was inflicted on myself that I had to come forward. The reason I am here was for the sewer • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 31 connection. This being because I was inflicted with all of these costs that was procured through the process of the construction the City, we had a meeting with the City and the contractor and neither of them would determine who was at fault. So the blame, nobody would take the blame but still I had to pay for that amount, well far more than what the amount that I stipulated here. I am just asking because of the hardship which is stipulates not to cause any hardships there were other parts, temporary fencing will be installed and secured through the whole process which was part of the problem of one of horses getting hurt. The other problem was initially when they built the road from Franklin Road down to the manhole there were no provisions to raise the fence. So that was neither the contractor, it wasn't the contractor's fault because they did accordingly to what the contract read. But that was the cause of the most extensive damage to one of my horses was running across that road and getting caught up in the fence. And like I said we spent a couple of months doctoring that horse and we are still working on it. That's the cost that incurred, it was a cost that was caused from the City sewer or whatever that was putting through property, the Five Mile sewer project. In fact all of these are, I would not have incurred any of these costs because of the project: part of that is why I stipulated that I am not asking for a free hook up but I am asking for a swap for what it has already cost me which is only fair. Morrow: May I respond? I am sensitive to your asking to be reimbursed or trade off for the cost but in my opinion we hire the contractor they are contract documents and stipulations for those types of remedies when those kinds of things happen. What I am suggesting to you here is that contractor needs to do the resolution of that and that is where the process needs to take place. So from my perspective that is who should be resolving the issue in terms of making you whole if that is the case. So I would move that we do not allow a sewer hook up at our expense. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley that the sewer hook up would not be approved, it would be denied, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: AVEST PLAZA LANDSCAPING: Bauens: Tom Bauens with Dakota Development representing Avest and the Fred Meyer development. I would just like to recap a little bit of the discussion we on April 16 at the City Council meeting concerning what we are proposing on the berms and landscaping • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 32 along Fairview Avenue frontage on lots 7 and the Locust Grove frontage on Lot 9. As you are well aware we discussed in great lengths on the 16th, we have been held up in completing this work due to the street improvement contract that ACRD is undertaking of which we have no control of. At this time as of today the curb and gutter and sidewalk has been completed on Locust Grove which frees up that frontage to continue landscaping. It is anticipated that the curb, gutter and sidewalk will be completed along Fairview hopefully by the end of this week. The curb was placed today and sidewalk will be right behind it. With the completion of the curb, gutter and sidewalk that now frees us up to finishing the berms and irrigation systems and all of the landscaping along those frontages from loop road to loop road. At the meeting on the 16th we asked the City Council to allow us a City Council development of the project allowing us to complete the berm and landscaping ors lot 7 which is the Chevron portion on Fairview Avenue. That landscaping would be delayed and completed in the normal sequence of events of the Chevron station be tied to its conditional use permit and the occupancy permit will be tied to the completing of that landscaping berm. The building permit for that project has been issued and the work has commenced today. The surveyors were staking, they will start the tank work probably this week. So that work is under way, we anticipate if we were to do the berm and landscaping in the normal sequence of events it should be 100% complete by the end of August. We also discussed delaying the comple#ion of the landscaping and berming on Lot 9 which is approximately 420 feet from the loop road north to the Brian property. As of today we have completed the berm, the construction of dirt berm on that, it is graded to 4 foot above the sidewalk and what we were proposed to do is to hydroseed the berm, do a temporary irrigation system on there to keep it watered on there for the summer but not do any landscaping plantings at this time just the hydroseed and it will mow it and maintain it and irrigate it through the summer with the temporary system. We would like to delay anything permanent until such time as water and power are available to that lot and it can be done per the 'site plans and the development of that part of lot 9. We would also proposed to post a cash bond of 11 d% of the cost of completing that 420 feet Of landscaping. We have gone back and researched the development agreement that was negotiated with the City and completed, we feel that these requests are well covered in the development. The development agreement allows for a phased development of the project. That is described in there, there is also language that ties the conditional use permit as the controlling document on what is to take place and the occupancy permits are tied to the building permit and the conditional use permit for each individual lot as they are developed. Article 11 in the development agreement allows for posting of bonds to guarantee completing of the work. Article 12 allows for an addendum to the development agreement stating when the improvements would be completed under a phased development approach. So we believe that these requests are well within the guidelines of the development and this is normal operating procedure for planned unit development projects such as this and would be completed per the requirements of the building permit and the conditional use permit which have been obtained on all of these parcels at this time. Since we last met and Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 33 discussed this another interesting twist has developed. This attemoon there was a meeting held on the site with Shari Stiles, Bruce Freckleton, Hal Bigley who is the landscape architect for Fred Meyer to discuss the slope of the berms adjacent to the Fred Meyer parcel on Locust Grove Road. Due to the final alignment and grade and sidewalk location of the ACHD improvements the resulting berms on Locust Grove are quite steep. WE have constructed the berms to the 4 foot height adjacent to the park lot and that is resulting in slopes that are approximately 1 to 1. In the original landscape plans submitted to the City and approved we had shown sod in plantings along that berm. What we proposed this afternoon in the meeting was to not to the sodding and do a ground cover and increase the amount of plantings on the slope that would grow up above the four foot height and actually reach approximately 6 foot in height and not do the sad. What we would end up with is a 1 1/2 to a 1 slope on the street side and a 2 to 1 slope on the parking lot side. And actually have more plantings and have more screening and even be higher than the foot requirement. The development agreement does not stipulate that it has to be sodded. It just stipulates that it has to be landscaped and a four foot above the adjacent sidewalk. So what we are asking for is a revision to the landscape plans that was submitted for approval on the Locust Grove frontage which start approximately just south of the first entrance of Fred Meyer and continue up the loop road. That is the problem area it is adjacent to the neighbors. So we are actually improving the screening situation with this new proposal. We are prepared to submit revised landscaping plans to the City for review and approval. There are representatives of Contractors Northwest the Fred Meyer contractor and landscaper here and they have some photographs and can present the revised landscaping plans if you would tike to see it. Any questions? Corrie: Any questions, Mr. Bentley? Bentley: I have a question for the chief, is that higher screening going to be a problem for seeing what is going on in the parking lot? Gordon: No sir it is not. Tolsma: I have a question, it says down here, well Shari wrote in here, (inaudible) junipers and other shrubs with bark instead of the originally approved (inaudible) sod Bauens: Sod and plantings, there was always plantings. There were always plantings, we are increasing the number of plantings and eliminating sod due to the steepness of the slopes. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Bauens: I would refer that to the landscaper. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 34 Tolsma: (Inaudible) Weatherby: To a rock from a bark, that could be done but (inaudible) Corrie: Excuse me we need you on tape. Weatherby: Dan Weatherby with Contractors Northwest. I think what you will find in what we want to submit is the new plantings will cover the bark eventually and it is more pleasing than the rock would be. There is some rock added to this. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Weatherby: Well if I could submit the picture you will see how steep that is, we had a hard time keeping anything on there. We will put a weed barrier and that should take care of the weeds. It is going to be hard to keep anything on that steep. of a slope. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Weatherbey: We can certainly look into that. Tolsma: I have seen a lot of developments around with bark on them and the first high wind comes the bark (inaudible) Weatherby: Yes it does Rountree: You are talking about 1 1/2 to 1 slopes and trying to hold anything on there you know well that is going to be a maintenance hazard for a long time in terms of maintaining the sidewalk and keeping the bark off of the sidewalk, the mud for sprinkler heads that break etc. I really don't think that is a good idea in terms of landscaping. I would suggest that if you have slopes there that steep that maybe you ought to get some kind of a stepped up berm with a retaining wall or look at some kind of concept that widens the berm so you can flatten the slopes. You are going to have people out there sweeping the sidewalk everyday for a whole lot of years. Weatherby: Do you suggest that we take the slope height down? Rountree: I suggest that you widen the berm so you reduce the slope down. Or go from the back of sidewalk up with a course of some kind of an architectural block. Weatherby: And keep the sod? Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 35 • Rountree: I am not saying sod but you are not going to hold a 1 1/2 to 1 slope. Unless you have some pictures of some of those that you have done that have stayed. Weatherby: Can I submit these? If you will notice on the proposed plan there is a cobble at the bottom to try and maintain that. Rountree: That is just as steep as I had envisioned. Morrow: It appears to me that you have curb on both sides of these berms at the present time. Weatherby: Yes on the parking lot side there is an extruded curb that sits approximately 7 inches high and then on the Locust Grove side it is the back of sidewalk where the berm is. Rountree: With cobble eventually? Weatherby: Proposed cobble at the base. We will be (inaudible) Bentley: One of the concerns I'd have would be with the bark situation is everyone has spoken to is it blowing out onto the sidewalks or floating out onto wind up being in the storm drains and the sewers out there. Tolsma: Charlie (inaudible) Rountree: Well to even it out it would take 4 feet Tolsma: (Inaudible) Weatherby: Can I speak on that, a two foot wall right now would maintain what you see on the pictures is what it would take to maintain that with sod and make it so we could do anything with it. I think what the cobble and the bedding the bark should stay in place until the shrubbery can take over and we are not opposed to changing that to rock if that would be preferable. But I don't think that the sod can be maintained, it is a high maintenance item and something else is a less maintenance item. I think what we are trying to do is what you envision here is try to have something that doesn't have to maintained all of the time. Rountree: I appreciate that, I am not saying that I want sod, I would just like to see those slopes flattened so you can keep something on them. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 36 Morrow: How long is it before the shrubs take over the bark or the chips or whatever it might be? Weatherby: I would say we are looking at a year to two years. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Rountree: You are talking (inaudible) Weatherby: Those are taller plants, we have a couple of different colors here and trying to implement colors and something that will grow. Because what we understand is the screening is the most important here for the neighbors and we are trying to achieve that and have a low maintenance product. Corrie: Any further comments? Questions of staff? Morrow: I would like to hear Shari and Gary's comments. Corrie: Ms. Stiles, I believe you were at that meeting today, weren't you? Stiles: Yes Mr. Mayor and Council, Bruce and t did go out to the site today and can appreciate the problem that they have. Part of the problem is that the berms had already been placed and the road was widened to what we had required as part of the conditional use permit and plat. I would like to see the new plan in detail prior to any approval. I like the idea of the wall but realize the cost involved in that too. Looking at it today it looks too steep to support anything. It is so steep and Gary said the plants that were planted here around City Hall were planted in 1987 so you are looking at 9 to 10 years before they really establish themselves. You are going to have kids climbing on it, I just don't know. I don't know what the best solution is, t guess that is why they are here today is they need some possible solutions. The neighbors, I don't know have any idea of what there preference would be or whether that matters as far as logically what is going to happen here. They can't widen the berm, the parking lot is in place, the curb is all in place. There is a set distance there for the berm. I would like to see sod but if it is not logical and the council wants to approve something different then has been approved I don't have any problem with that but I would like to see a detailed plan and I would like members of the Council to also look at that plan prior to approval. Corrie: Shari, could they use more mature shrubbery than the younger plants to start them bigger? Stiles: They have suggested one gallon and those are pretty small. • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 37 Weatherby: Mr. Mayor, the problem with plants this time of year I understand is with the Olympics going to Atlanta, all of the mature shrubbery is leaving the area. We have submitted one gallon plants on a closer grid and put it on a grid pattern so it is not horizontal so it breaks up any water flow if we can. That is a problem getting any mature trees. Come: Mr. Smith any comments? Rountree: I would like to see you make some kind of an effort to flatten those slopes with some kind of creative design. I am not particularly desirous of mandating sod, I know it is high maintenance. I like the concept of at least putting in the berm and getting something growing on the berm from the loop road north with temporary irrigation and a maintenance commitment and a bond. I think it is doable. Weatherby: Is there a way we can bring some of the height down to get rid of that steepness? Rountree: No, that was really mandated by public testimony. Morrow: I don't have any problem with the temporary occupancies and the bonds, that is what those things are for. It is my understanding that on lot 9 there is partial construction in a phase of that is going on. That can work under a temporary occupancy and the bond as is normal. The issue that I am concerned most about is the one that has come up today and it seems to me like the solutions or the only solution may be, I am not hung up on having sod there either, I think that we can do something different there, but we do need to flatten the slope a little bit and maybe the way we do that is with the interlocking pumice wall system or something like that would maybe get up 60 inches in height or do something to diminish that slope so that they have a better chance of working. So I think that if we could come to some sort of resolution on how to address that problem. I don't have a problem with any of the other things. Weatherby: What vehicle should we use to come to that solution? Should we resubmit another plan? Corrie: 1 was going to say you could do that or hold off for another two weeks or whatever Council so desires. From what I am hearing they are wanting to see some kind of concept here that you are going to use to, you can't flatten it you have to keep the same height, but you need to keep the ground off. Well I think that from my perspective I think the staff can handle that. I think that I am prepared to approve all three things tonight so that this could press forward and get done and be open and be attractive. I think that with respect to handling this height issue and the steepness of it if you submit a proposal to our staff and Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 38 it is acceptable to them they certainly can poll each of us and see if it is acceptable to us. I think there are some solutions there but I think you need to explore what it might be and what would work best for the aesthetics of the project. So that would be my recommendation. Rountree: I would agree with that. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council there is someone from across the street that has come tonight, she has indicated that she would like to address the Council. I think it would be in fairness to listen to her concerns. Would that be possible? Cahoon: Mary Cahoon, my residence is 1875 North Locust Grove, I have some special concems where I am located because I am right thereby that loop road, it is right across from my driveway. As far as the berming right there where my house is located it slopes down really small at that particular point and that is where they have all of those power boxes by the side of the wall. They have that big ugly green metal transformer, whatever it is for electrical things. Their drive thru right there I didn't realize that had been approved but there is a drive thru. So I don't know if those head lights are going to be shining directly into my home. I don't know if they are going to head east to west, when they go through that drive thru at TCBY there. So I have some real special needs at that point as far as the berming and the planting of trees and those types of things because it is very invasive of my privacy. That TCBY on top of the building is right in my front window, I have some real special screening needs, I am the most impacted person by this particular development and Larry Durkin from Dakota has said that during the different meetings. So, please take that into consideration when you are looking at these plans and how those berms are. Please keep it at that 4 foot level, we need at least that. If they can get more mature trees do it now, that dust is really really bad right now. Send a water truck down there right away because I have to sand blast our bicycles and stuff. You were talking about the grass and in my job I kind of deal with water efficient landscaping. I am not really opposed to the bark, I think sometimes that can look really nice. There are also different species of grasses, there is buffalo grass that is very drought tolerant. There is not as much maintenance on it. You can talk to your local turf man and find out more information with regard to different species of grass. There are ornamental grasses that is a lower maintenance type thing. I can understand as we starting facing these critical water issues that we need to start thinking in those manners as well. So remember me. Thank you. Morrow: Mr. Mayor if I might, Tom there was I think in terms of the original applications and the original approval there were some implications made that she would be well taken care of with respect to those things, could you address that please? Bauens: Yes we did guarantee that Mrs. Cahoon would be taken care of and you have to Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 39 appreciate that what is out there today is not the finished product. One of the problems that we have at the loop road entry to Locust Grove is we have to maintain the vision triangles that is required by ACRD so that slope does have to taper back in order to see around the comer. The grading of the berms is rough at this time, planting are not all in. If we take a wait and see attitude and there still is a problem then we are willing to work with Mrs. Cahoon and address it at that time. Until we get everything done and see what the impact is going to be if any, we will accommodate her as best we can at the time. We are far from done along that way. Corrie: Thank you Tom, any further comments or discussion? (End of Tape) Morrow: I think Mr. Mayor it seems to me like what we need to do here is that we need to approve the completion of the landscaping on the lot with the Chevron with its construction, we need to approve the temporary landscaping and the irrigation system on lot 9 and then we need to approve the berm reconfiguration on Lot 1 subject to staff approval. I think those would be the three issues that we are dealing with here, is that correct? Corrie: Yes that is what I have got. Morrow: Then I would move that we approve the, which is the lot for the chevron? Corrie: Lot 7 (Inaudible) Morrow I would move that we approve the landscaping for the Chevron on Lot 7 to be done with the construction and completion of the Chevron, that we approve the temporary landscaping for Lot 9 and a temporary occupancy for that. And that we also approve subject to staff approval the change in the berm design for Lot 1 and a portion of Lot 2. I am sorry that the bonds would be required as presented by Mr. Bauens. (Inaudible) Morrow: For Lot 9 (inaudible) just lot 9. (Inaudible) Bentley: Secgnd • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 40 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley that we approve the completion of Lot 7 with the chevron completion, #2 the temporary lot 9 with the temporary opening and the bond on 9, and the berm on lots 1 and 2 approved with staff approval, is that correct? Any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move for a five minute recess. Rountree: Second FIVE MINUTE RECESS ITEM #8: FINAL PLAT: FIELDSTONE MEADOWS NO. 5 SUBDIVISION BY GARY VOIGT: Corrie: We have a motion by Mr. Morrow to table this until, I am sorry what date? Morrow: Well no, the staff has indicated in their letter it would take at least 3 weeks so table it to June 4th. Corrie: And second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #9: FINAL PLAT: HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 5 BY INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT: Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the final plat for Haven Cove No. 5 subdivision subject to the meeting of all staff, ACRD and Nampa Meridian conditions. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that Haven Cove No. 5 subdivision by approved with all staff, ACHD conditions, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: FINAL PLAT: BEDFORD PLACE SUBDIVISION N0. 2 BY BRIGHTON • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 41 CORPORATION: Morrow: Question Mr. Mayor for staff, item 8 under site specific conditions deals with the developer shall provide the City of Meridian building department with compaction testing results across the lots receiving fill material for the relocation of the Finch lateral. My question there is so what? So we have a spec that they are to meet that we are telling them in terms of 95% plus or we have a method for compaction that we are giving them guidance as to what it is we want there? Smith: I am sorry Councilman Morrow I was doing some writing, but I believe I understood you to ask what the standards are for the compaction of the fill in the irrigation ditch areas is that correct'? Morrow: Well yes, in item 8 of the site specific comments we have made the comment the developer shall provide the City of Meridian building department with compaction testing results across the lots receiving fill material during the relocation of the Finch Lateral. My question to you is what is the criteria, he could provide you, do we have a minimum compaction that we are trying to tell them we want there to meet there. What is the condition that we are asking them to meet? Smith: I can't be specific Councilman on the percentage but I believe there is a requirement in the Uniform Building code that requires any significant backfill to meet a certain compaction effort. I don't know what that number is, I am guessing it is 95% maximum density as determined by a specific density test. t believe the 95% is what we have been using on other subdivisions. Morrow: Okay Smith: Our effort here is to ensure the foundations that are built in these fill areas are going to be adequately supported. Morrow: I understand that. Mr. Mayor Rountree: I am sorry I have another question for staff, on site specific comment #4, the effect of that is asking for or requiring an additional 10 foot utility easement does that easement then affect lot size and get into a problem with lots not meeting appropriate size? Smith: Councilman Rountree and Mayor and Council, it would affect the setback on the structure. tt wouldn't affect the net lot area. But you are correct the request here is to add the ten feet to the existing or to the requested 20 foot easement from Nampa and Meridian • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 42 Irrigation District. Engineer Gene Smith is here this evening and handed me a copy of a license agreement from Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and I guess maybe it is going to get down to a point of the attorneys for the developer and the irrigation district fighting this out as far as whether or not this easement is an exclusive easement for Nampa Meridian or if other utilities can be located within that easement. It is Gene Smith's attitude that after he read the license agreement that it is not exclusive to Nampa and Meridian irrigation district. I guess that remains to be seen from their attorney's interpretation of it. They verbally had told us I believe Bruce Freckleton anyway that they didn't want the utilities within their easement. Other than right angle crossings. Corrie:, Any other questions for staff? Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the final plat for Bedford Place Subdivision No. 2 subject to staff conditions, notification of staff to the applicant what the compaction specifications will be and ACHD and Nampa Meridian specifications. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A LEARNING CENTER FOR 50 STUDENTS BY MILLSTREAM PROPERTIES: Corrie: I will now open the public hearing and invite anybody from the audience that have any testimony or the developer or the applicant. Rountree: I have a question before we take action which we would probably be to table this item, but for Shari or Gary is there sufficient parking set up for this? It looks like ultimately you could have 11,000 square feet of building with both phases with 51 parking spaces. Stiles: I believe our ordinance only requires one space for every ten students. I would have to double check that but they do show adequate parking for what our ordinance requires. Haacke: I know we are required with the development on this we are required to have 28 on this I know we have substantial parking for what the code is asking us to provide. Charles Haacke, Salt Lake City, Millstream Properties, was sworn by the City Attorney. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 43 C~ Haacke: I basically was coming to this meeting the second time to answer any questions that the Council has. I really didn't have any more to bring up towards it. It was my understanding that it was going to be approved from the last meeting after ACHD findings were submitted which I gave the next day to Planning and Zoning. Rountree: Have you reviewed the Planning & Zoning findings of fact and conclusions? Haacke: I have Rountree: And are you in agreement with the conditions? Haacke: I am Morrow: Have you reviewed staff conditions? Haacke: Yes I have Morrow: From both Shari Stiles and the City Engineer? Haacke: Yes I have seen Ms. Stiles and the engineering departments requirements for landscaping, berms, lighting, and ACHD all of their requirements, half of 4th Street West being paved, curb and gutter, and various radius changes and we have agreed to all recommendations. Corrie: Any further questions for staff? Thank you, anybody else from the public that would like to give testimony at this time? Discussion of Council? Hearing none I will close the public hearing. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would move that the Meridian City Council adopts and approves the findings of fact and conclusions as prepared by the Planning and Zoning. Morrow: Second Cowie: Motion is made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow to approve of the findings of fact and conclusions of law from the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea :~ Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 44 i Corrie: Entertain a motion for the decision and recommendation. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby approves the conditional use permit request by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma, any further discussions All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY CRYSTAL MARTINEZ: Crystal Martinez, 1432 West Carlton, was sworn by the City Attorney. Martinez: Mayor and members of the Council I brought several things since our last public hearing that validated some concerns. One which is my dog, I have a German Shepherd dog, I had a few of my parents I expressed the' concern about my dog to them and I had asked a few of them if they would write a letter or notification to you guys and 1 have those letters right here and I would like to present those to you. I don't want to make this long so I won't read them. But if you could read them I would appreciate it. Since we last spoke I have acquired my State license, I have that here. t don't have a copy for you because it has to be (inaudible) present for parents to see so you can go ahead, I will get you a copy of this too. Since then I have also acquired my CPR and first aid certificate which we discussed last time I didn't have a copy of it at that time but I was taking that for the Children's safety and pediatrics. Since then I have also acquired a letter from Robert Speck who I believe you might be familiar with the name, he deals with the State regulations. According to my pole and fence height, I had talked to Jim Rabitt and Shari regarding this matter. They directed me to go to the State and see what the State regulations were and kind of try and comply with that so I could have that done before the previous hearing that we had. This is a copy of the letter he mailed me, I am just going to read a couple of the things that he says here. He says,"although there are no specific rules covering the swimming pools located in the yards of the homes based in family group day care facilities. I generally recommend that a fence from 3 to 4 feet minimum in height be used for this purpose." He says please the type B which is also in here and you will find in here which is semi-public pools which you would find in athletic clubs, country clubs, swimming clubs, hotels and apartments, etc. are only required to have four feet. My fence is 6 foot on 15 feet of it, the other is up on the deck so that is four. feet. ~ do have right now • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 45 a master lock on the gate which we talked about at the last public hearing also. So I would like to present this to you. I have also acquired my doing business as name and I don't have a copy to give to you either but you can look this over if you would like to. One of my main concerns was my neighbor Mrs. Marino, I probably didn't pronounce her fast name right. She had some comments that were very valid and I wanted to touch on those and tell you what I have done since then as far as her questions. I really didn't get a comment on all of their questions. One of their questions was that it would lower their property value, if I put a day care, a group day care in this vicinity I am in the R-8 section, I don't believe there are any covenants or restrictions that exclude me from that. I don't believe that it would lower her value, only because maybe being a single parent when I moved into that area we are within walking distance of the elementary, the middle school and the high school. Anybody moving into that general residential area would probably check that so they would know that their kids would be safe to walk to those distances. So I would think that as a home buyer being within walking distance of all three schools that this would be a highly populated area for people with children to move into. So I would think that would be an asset rather than a minus for her property: Her other concern was the children and the noise. Like I said again we are in a residential area that is within walking distance of all three schools, there are going to be children playing wherever. I do not myself find children's noises annoying. One of her other concerns was my dog, I think the letters you will find that my parents, I had one parent that her son had gotten bit twice by a dog, the little boy was terrified of dogs and now has become very close to my dog in the sense that he would like to take my dog home with him. So, that makes me feel good. I also have a 2 1/2 year old little girl, when I purchased my dog I purchased it out at the Humane Society she was an abused dog she had gotten her leg broken by the previous master so she is very timid. She is not at all aggressive dog, her size is probably the only thing that would intimidate you and she is a very small German Shepherd, she is not full blooded. She has had obedience classes also. Another one of her concerns was that as she looked into my back yard that she couldn't see anybody there as in an adult watching the children. I just want to clarify that she has half of my property is her backyard. That half is, if you will take out the map of my home the half that is her back yard is my swimming pool area that indeed is fenced off and there are no children there. So therefore when I am out on my patio she lacks seeing almost 15 feet of my patio area which is where I sit and watch the children from. So, that was the other concern, I am not saying these are not valid concerns I am glad that she is here and I am glad that she brought up these concerns. I did also make an attempt to notify her of this hearing, I went to her house personally. I also at that time brought up the noise factor because that seemed to be a concern to her. I asked her if it was bothering her, she said please don't your business around me. And I said I am not trying to I am just trying to be a good neighbor so the noise doesn't bother you. I think we are both adults and if she is willing to meet me halfway I am sure willing to go the extra mile to please her as far as noise goes. I just would like to say that I am applying for a group day care conditional permit which would require me to take care of • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 46 up to 12 children no more.. I do intend to just do that, if this is a big concern that I will go to more than 12 children for her I would ask that the Council put that into the stipulations and say that I can never apply for a center license which would be okay for me. I am happy with that amount of children. I do home school my 14 year old daughter and so she is home with me during those hours too so there is another person there. She also has taken CPR and first aid classes. We have also looked into having a swim instructor come out and help the kids with swimming pool safety tips about swimming and the water. That is through BSU student employment so my kids will be aware of the water and the concerns about water. Last but not least so I can make this short for you guys, I have another letter here from another mother. She generally just goes through the same thing about Louie and also touches on some other things. I would just like tp read these to you. It says, "Crystal's day care is always kept clean, she is always loving and hugs and has proper food for the kids. Diaper changing is adequate. Crystal is very gentle and loving with all of the children. The fence is totally adequate to keep the children. The automatic locking gate I agree with for the simple reason that my child could figure it out how to open it up, a padded lock gate would be much more harder and much more time consuming to open." Those are just basically some of her comments that she has put on here. "I feel totally comfortable leaving my small children at Crystal's with her dog because the children learn to respect and love animals in an environment that is safe:" All of my parents have included a phone number which you may call at your leisure and that is about all that I wanted to touch on. I have also got my finger prints through the State and like I said I do have my State license now I have acquired that and went through the proper regulations with that and I tried to comply with all legalities on this issue: Corrie: Thank you Crystal, Council any questions? Rountree: You apparently have gone through the findings of fact and conclusions prepared by Planning and Zoning, you have addressed several of those issues. Is there anything other than the fence around the pool that you want to address? Martinez: I didn't see any others that we didn't address in the last one that I haven't taken care of. I have a wood stove, there has been a gate put around that. All of that I had prior to our last meeting. I think I have child proofed my house. Rountree: Is your dog licensed with the City of Meridian? Martinez: Yes he is, I learned that the hard way. Corrie: Thank you Crystal, anyone else from the public that would like to offer testimony? Shirley Marino, 1037 Washington Place, was sworn by the City Attorney. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 47 C~ Marino: I just wanted to put my lonely opinion on this, I am the neighbor that is behind her and I just wanted to say I have been in my home about 23 years so I am probably one of the first ones that was in that small neighborhood that is there in Phillips Addition. I didn't buy my home to have a business next to me. She is, I have talked to Crystal and I understand why she wants a business in her home and being a single mom and all of that. I know she would like to stay with her children. I am also a single mom and raised by two girls alone and I didn't start a day care in my home or anything like that. But I just wanted, I don't want a business in my back yard, I don't want the noise. I am sure she is a very capable lady to run a day care I just don't want a business in my backyard. I don't work an 8 to 5 job like I am sure a lot of her time for children are like from 6 to 6 or something like that. So the time that I will be using my back yard is not necessarily when children aren't there. I do work on weekends so my days off will be during the week. I don't know how many people work 8 to 5 jobs around that, I don't know if that would be a problem or not. Children's noises don't annoy me, I just think 12 of them that could possibly be there at one time can be loud and if I do plan a family function or something in my backyard it could be kind of annoying then. That is all I have to say, I just wanted to voice my opinion. Rountree: Are you aware of any restrictions in your covenants for you subdivision that disallow a business? Marino: Idot that I am aware of no. Rountree: Would you be open to a visit if in fact you were having a family function or a get together where noise is a problem and indicating such with the applicant to say Wednesday afternoon we are going to have a barbecue I would appreciate it if you would keep the kids in would that be of your nature? Marino: I don't have anything against that I just think it is kind of silly of a homeowner to have to ask a neighbor. Rountree: I understand. Morrow: Are there even covenants and restrictions in your subdivision? Marino: I do not know. I never checked into any kind of stats and statistics or anything like that. Corrie: Thank you very much. Anybody else from the public that would like to give testimony? Martinez: I just wanted to touch on the fact that most group day cares that provide care • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 48 for 12 or less children, I do a lot of before and after school care. So I would just like the Council to consider that half of my children that I will be caring for will be gone from 8 in the morning until four in the afternoon. So therefore that would leave with my six children most of which are either in diapers and can't go outside because they are five months old or an age where they are not going to enjoy the outside play. The others which are 2 and three year olds which will simply go outside and probably play in the sandbox or on the swing set with supervision. I can understand her point with the noise thing too but just like she stated if she is going to have a family get together in her back yard then I will have to tolerate noise at that point too and it doesn't bother me, I don't feel offended by that. I will not feel offended if she comes over to my house. I have made it very apparent to her that I would be more than happy to comply even to give her a tour bf my day care. So she can see the inside of my home and I don't have a problem with that either. I don't have a problem giving her my phone number so she can call and say, so she doesn't have to walk over. She does live in a culdesac and I want you to be aware of that because one of the things she was concerned about last time was traffic. My parents would literally have to get lost to find themselves in her culdesac. She does live directly behind be but she lines on Washington Place. If you are familiar with that area at all they would have to completely around the comer, around the block and into the culdesac and turn around in her culdesac to come back out. All of my parents right now that I have that I am caring for their children they come in through Linder and exit on Linder which means that that go out Washington Street and on Carlton so there is no extra traffic there either. Corrie: Thank you Crystal, any further testimony from the public? Staff, discussion? Rountree: I just have a question for the Planning and Zoning Commissioner Johnson, Jim on the condition within the findings of fact about the six foot high fence and the automatic locking gate I read the transcript but I am still not sure what that solves or doesn't solve. Johnson: I don't know Commissioner Rountree if I can answer that directly, that concern was brought up by Malcolm MacCoy. He had visited the premises and he had some questions concerning the fence, the debris in the yard and the fence lock. among other things. He was concerned that gate could be opened by one of the children. There was no resolution as to how that could be improved is the concern he addresses is the way I read that. (Inaudible) Rountree: Just a locking gate. (Inaudible) • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 49 Rountree: That is all I needed t couldn't tell what kind of an issue it was just by reading it. Johnson: Well I guess the other point that might be important, I don't recall any testimony that was objecting to the applicant's desires to have a day care center there at Planning and Zoning. Corrie: Any further discussion or questions from staff? Rountree: The only other comment I would make is the same comment -that I made previously we look at the fee structure for sewer and water and increase that above one residential unit to two and that the trash be a commercial trash rate. Crookston: Mrs. Marino did testify before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Rountree: I am aware of that Wayne. Crookston: I thought that Jim indicated that he didn't recall (inaudible) The concern is whether or not you want to adopt or change the findings as a result of the additional items that Mrs. Martinez submitted. It is totally up to the Council. Morrow: I have a question, while we are thinking about the evidence, the question on the six foot locking gate issue, basically what we are doing there is that the area around the pool be protected by at least a six foot fence and automatic locking gate placed not more than six inches from the top of the fence and the applicant or an employee shall be with any child that is in the back yard. If this condition is not met the City may require that the pool be drained to allow the operation of a day care. I guess my first candid thought is if we place that type of restriction in the findings of fact and conclusions and adopt them within that then is not the burden of enforcement upon us and who does that, who does that enforcement, who does that checking and when doss that happen. I have I think that we need to be asking those questions if we are going to place this finite of a management within the findings of fact and conclusions. Crookston: That is very correct, it would have to be the Zoning Enforcement officer that would have to come out to take a look at it periodically. Morrow: Well then my next question to that would be is as a City do we want to make this a practice and have the zoning enforcement officer dealing with these issues on every conditional use that may come up. Tolsma: (Inaudible) • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 50 • Morrow: No I understand that my question is one of a philosophical point. This appears in the findings of fact and conclusions and the conditions, one of the conditions that I am asking how we go about enforcing that condition. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Rountree: I would suggest that we change, amend the language of that. Crookston: The concern was the pool. Morrow: I understand the concern and I understand the locked gate, the question still is in my mind is that if we make these conditions not only for this particular application but for other applications in the future then we also accept the responsibly of making sure those things happen, is that true? Crookston: I think that is correct. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Morrow: I guess my point is do they belong within these documents to try and manage that (inaudible) do we want to put ourself in that position as a City. (Inaudible) Rountree: Would it be sufficient to say fence locked gate and employee supervision at all times (inaudible) back yard, that is a condition, still all of these conditions need some degree of enforcement, but if it is reported that is not being done that is a condition of the conditional use, then the conditional use could be revoked. How much more safeguarding do we need to do as a City. Morrow: I think what we need to look at is what is practical. We simply don't have the staff and people to police everything all of the time. The question in my mind is should we set ourselves in that position. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Morrow: And I agree with his point. Rountree: My question to counsel what is our liability situation what degree of effort do we need to take in this situation? Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 51 • Crookston: I think that Walt is correct and that if we require some of these things that the City has responsibility to investigate at least whether or not they are being complied with. Some of these conditions are quite severe to the extent of meeting the requirements of the condition. The concem from the Planning and Zoning Commission however was the pool. The way these are drafted is to try and get around the problem with the pool. It is totally up the City how much they want to go along with these. The investigation as to meeting these requirements is quite difficult. Rountree: But this particular condition the reaction to not meeting the condition is something other than (inaudible) continuance of the conditional use permit. Crookston: I am sorry say that again. Rountree: Basically this is a condition and a result of conditions not met to (inaudible) whether or not the conditional use is maintained or continued. Crookston: You could do it that way. Rountree: Which is what all of these conditions are. If it is a locked gate it would have as much possibility of being investigated as the hours of operation. Crookston: That is correct, but someone is going to have to go out there and see if it is locked. I think that is what Walt's concern is. Tolsma: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Martinez: The State does monitor that because when I talked to Bob Spec and Deanna Rich and also because I am in, will be going through the State program through Child Care Connection, I don't know if you are familiar with that but it helps low income families provide care for their children and helps them with their day care cost. They also will be coming out on the 17th and the 23rd so I will be getting if granted this conditional use permit I will get several different directions of supervision. Which I gladly accept, I don't have an problem with that. My gate, I have a two and half year old so you have to realize that I am not only running a day care but I am a mom full time. So locking that gate is a natural thing to me, that is why, when I purchased the home I have a fourteen year old daughter also and she was like great a pool and I thought the baby will fall in there and drown if I don't put a gate up and a fence. That is one of the reasons why we did that too was also to comply with day care rules and also to comply with me not being fearful of my daughter falling in the pool (inaudible) or something like that. If there are any questions • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 52 you want me to address let me know. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I am prepared to offer a motion. Corrie: I will close the public haaring. Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law to amend item E on page 9 to read that the area surrounding the pool be protected with at least a 6 foot fence with a lock and that the applicant (End of Tape) who is in the back yard. If this condition is not met the City may require, strike that please, and also that, Crookston: What are you striking? Morrow: I am, t want the statement to say, to end at, any child who is in the back yard, period. And that Crookston: Without the changes that you had? You are striking Morrow: I started to read on into a sentence that I did not want included in item e. Crookston: Just for reference would you read item E so we can tell? Morrow: Alright, "that the area surrounding the pool be protected with at least a 6 foot fence with a locked gate and that the applicant or an employee shall be with any child who is in the back yard." The second condition would be that the commercial trash, 2 sewer and waters be charged. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion? All those in favor of the amended motion by roll call. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Nay, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: 3 Yeas, 1 Nay Corrie: Entertain a motion for the decision. Morrow: The City Council of the City of Meridian approves the conditional use permit as amended requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth in these amended findings of fact and conclusions of law for similar • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 53 • conditions as found justified and appropriate by the City Council. That the applicant shall be required to meet the requirements of Bruce Freckleton, Shari Stiles, the water and sewer requirements as amended, fire and life safety, Uniform Fire Code and other ordinances of the City of Meridian. Conditional Use should be subject to review upon notice to the applicant and by the City. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree on the decision and recommendation, any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: 3 Yea, 1 Nay ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A TRANSFER OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FROM KIDZ CONNECTION TO CHILDREN'S UNIQUE STYLE: Corrie: I will open the public hearing at this time and ask that the applicant come forward. Steven Jenkins, 7200 Southdale, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Jenkins: We are requesting a transfer of conditional use permit from an existing day care center to new ownership and a new name. Rountree: You would be the operator under the new ownership and new name? Jenkins: My wife is the operator. Rountree: The conditions under the previous conditional use are acceptable to you, you have seen them? Jenkins: Yes and yes. Corrie: Anybody else from the public that would like to issue testimony at this time. Council, discussion? Morrow: Mr. Mayor I have a question of Mr. Gary Smith with respect to Bruce Freckleton's comment. Sanitary sewer and water services to this facility is from an existing service line. The past years water meter records for this facility indicate the use is slightly higher than was anticipated when the assessments were calculated for Children's Unique Style. The heavier usage is less than 1 additional equivalent residential unit. Therefore no adjustment will be applicable at this time. Could you comment on that. The other other day cares we • Meridian City Council May. 7, 1996 Page 54 • have done tonight required the 2 residential equivalent units. That doesn't seem to be appropriate in this case. Smith: Just looking at it strictly from their water usage only it is a policy of the City Council to require, is this an in home day care use or is this a commercial building? I don't know right off hand. If it is a commercial building if it is set up for a day care use then we would go by the water usage. If it is a residential building then the policy in the past has been that yes there is an additional assessment that is made to a residence being used as a business. Morrow: Could we have the applicant maybe answer that please? Jenkins: The home was originally a residential home and it has been turned into a commercial day care center. There is no residence living at that site. Morrow: So then everything would be based on the commercial rates is that right? Smith: Yes sir it would work against the water usage as far as the assessment is concerned. Morrow: I have no further questions. Rountree: Would that be clear in the conditional use that exists? Smith: I am sorry? Rountree: The commercial rate for water and sewer, would that be clear in the conditional use permit that currently exists? Smith: Well their request is that they enter into an assessment agreement so that we can monitor their water usage for a period of time for 12 months and then we will make an adjustment if that is the case up or down. The rates that we charge are the same as residential, we don't have a commercial rate that is variance from the residential. Corrie: Any further discussion? Bentley: Which rate would the trash fall under? Smith: I have no idea Councilman, I don't know. Morrow: It would be commercial if it is a commercial building. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 55 U Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the transfer of the conditional use permit. Morrow: Second Corrie: Okay, I will close the public hearing, motion and second is made, motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow the request for transfer of a conditional use permit be permitted, any further comments? Rountree: Do we need findings? Corrie: Not on a transfer. All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Smith: Mr. Mayor may I ask a question on procedure, when a conditional use permit is issued or transferred and there are conditions attached to that, how do we myself the public works department know that these conditions are being adhered to. Is there a paper that is issued for the conditional use permit. For instance on the last one there is an additional assessment that is being charged what brings that applicant into door of public works department to pay for that additional assessment. Also on this this applicant needs to come to the public works department and sign a reassessment agreement as part of your approval conditions. What makes those people follow through and do that. Morrow: Weil I would think the conditional use permit wouldn't take effect until those provisions have been complied with. In other words we notify them by letter of what it is that has to happen in order for the conditional use to become effective. Smith: That is the thing that I don't know, I don't know what happens to a conditional use permit. Is it actually a piece of paper that has conditional use permit written on it that says it has been granted to the applicant and signed by the Mayor for the Council or signed by the City Clerk for the Council. I just need to know I guess so I know that these conditions ere adhered to by the applicant through the public works department particularly but through any of the other city departments also. Rountree: Great question. Corrie: I don't think that we do. Berg: I know what the accessory use application is dealt with that is dealt with the P & Z Administrator and that is just on letterhead authorizing that they have an accessory use. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 56 I haven't really seen any CUP's in my file but I will research that out. At least research and see what kind of a procedure we had before and report back to you. If we need to change it starting working on (inaudible) Crookston: I have never had to deal with that because I have not gone that far with it. But there should be a written document that says that they are granted a conditional use and on a transfer that they should come back in and a letter to that effect needs to be stated also. And that if it is to be conditioned upon for transfer for the prior findings of fact that should be stated on that letter. Corrie: That would also be along with the reassessment agreement and evaluation should be on that too. We can certainly do a letter up to that effect and let the Council review it too it that be the desire. Do you want the Planning and Zoning Administrator to write a letter or do you want the Mayor to (inaudible) Crookston: It should be by the Mayor, the Accessory Use can be done by the Planning and Zoning (inaudible) Smith: Mr. Mayor, excuse me again, would we need the zoning enforcement officer to verify that the applicant's aren't in operation without that letter? Crookston: I think that should be done yes. Smith: I am jus# afraid as busy as we all are that and I am not thinking that the applicant's would do this on purpose, but they could walk out the door and go back to business as usual and nothing would ever happen as far as a follow up is concerned to make sure the conditions are, your conditions of approval are being met. Such as the reassessment agreement and payment of additional connection fee. I really don't know what those mechanisms should be like I am just, I just feel as though something is dropping through a crack here. Morrovv: Let me offer this suggestion and maybe we need to get moving on here but the way you deal with this is that under normal circumstances with conditional uses or any other type of action there is an appeal period. We may or may not have that. The point is that generally speaking the head of the P & Z department is the one that signs and makes the notification to the applicant that the conditional use for example is affective ten days hence and was passed by the Council on May 7th subject to these conditions that you must meet. It will be effective at the end of the appeal period which might say for example May 17th. At that point in time after having met these conditions then you can begin your business. Now under normal circumstances it is something along that line that is done with respect to conditional use permits. So the process is fairly simple. Maybe we • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 57 don't have the capability of doing that. If we don't then we need to acquire that capability so that staff knows what has to happen, the applicant at the point of making the application and going through the process understands what has to happen before they can start up. So I think that if we don't have any of those things in place right now that we need to adjust our procedure so that they are all in place so everybody has a fair chance of knowing what is expected of them. Smith: Thank you Morrow: So I guess to finish the thought out is that we can have Wayne and Will research if we have that capability now or let's find out what it is we have got. Then we implement the procedure. If we need to modify it then we will cover it at a strategic planning session and get it committed by ordinance or whatever it takes to get it done. Crookston: It would created as of the Council action, people have 30 days to file an appeal, but the approval would be effective as of the date that the conditional use was granted unless we put in there that it is granted upon the issuance of a letter from either the City Clerk or the Planning & Administrator. Morrow: Well I think it makes certain sense to, if you grant somebody the opportunity to press ahead with something than an appeal comes through. Then what do you do tell them to stop? Crookston: Yes, if that is part of it, but it is granted unless an appeal is filed of the granting or if it is denied an appeal is filed because of the denial. Morrow: Well that is something that we can deal with at a later time. ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RAILSIDE SUBDIVISION BY RON YANKE: Corrie: I will open the public hearing and invite the representative from Railside Subdivision. Morrow: Before we press on with this hearing, I do want to ask the Council, I am a titled owner of a parcel that was bought in Layne Industrial Park which was also developed by the Yanke group. I would ask the Gouncil whether they see that to be a conflict or not in hearing of this issue and if so then I will stand down. Corrie: You are directly involved with this parcel? i • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 58 Morrow: No, I am not directly involved with this parcel I am a titled owner of a lot in Layne Industrial Park which was developed by this same group of people. If the Council perceives that to be a conflict I will stand down. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would move that the Council does not perceive Mr. Morrow's situation with property ownership a conflict of interest. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Bentley that there is no conflict and that Mr. Morrow can continue on with the Council on this hearing, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Tolsma: Mr. Mayor I will have to declare a conflict because I do a lot of work for Mr. Ron Yanke (inaudible) Morrow: I would move that Mr. Tolsma's situation in doing work for the Yanke shop is not a conflict in the hearing of this issue. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that there is no conflict with Mr. Tolsma, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Gary Lee, JUB Engineers, 1750 Summertree, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: Our request this evening before you is a preliminary plat known as Railside Industrial Park Subdivision. It is about 23 acres situated on Pine Road just west of Locust Grove. There are 13 lots planned in the development, average size in there is 1 to 1 1/2 acres in size for each lot. The intended use for this particular development it is zoned light industrial presently and is situated in the City limits of the City of Meridian. The property is surrounded on three sides anyway by industrial zoning, light industrial to the east, south and west. There is a piece of R-8 zoning right across Pine Street to the north. There is an existing residential development there at this time called Maws Addition. The current use of that property is agricultural and has been for quite a few years. The improvements planned for the development include standard ACHD roads for all of the interior streets which will conform to their collector standard. The Pine Street widening program has been • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 59 discussed at the Highway District. There will be additional rights of way dedicated there for future widening of Pine Street although I don't think that is going to take place anytime real soon. Locust Grove as you are aware takes a jog in that area to the east about 600 feet. It crosses the railroad tracks and couples up with Franklin Road. That jog will eventually be eliminated so there are plans for right away along the east boundary for this project for the extension of Locust Grove Road. We have met with the Highway District to review the requirements and standards as well. Although that stretch of road won't be built at this time either. Within the development we have requested a waiver from both the Highway District and the City on installing sidewalks on one side of street for the interior street running north south known as Ralston. The interior street running east and west known as Commercial. ACHD has granted their approval for that waiver and we would like or request the same from the City. The preliminary plat has also identified some landscaping buffers along Pine Road at the request of Shari Stiles we have shown 20 feet in there. We would like to request that the Council consider that those, that easement or that landscaping be placed in an easement in lieu of a common tot. Our reasoning behind that is there is no purpose for a business owners association for this development. We would like to stay away from having one developed just to maintain landscaping. The way the lay out is situated that would affect two lots on Pine Street, they won't be taking access directly on Pine but they will have a continuous strip of land along there. We would like to keep it in an easement. We have reviewed the ACHD staff comments and we concur with that they have recommended and we will be working with them in the final design for roadway widths and so on and so forth. We have reviewed the City Engineer and City Planner comments and there were three of them in that list that we would like to discuss. The first one being general condition #4 about the sidewalk issue. Again we would like to request a waiver on that on those two streets I mentioned previously. On site specific condition #4 the landscaping again, like I said place that in an easement in lieu of a common lot. Also, there was mention of discussion for landscaping along the west boundary of the property since it borders an existing home and it also will border future alternate living housing project in that area. We have spoken to the developer the Wayne Forrey and he offered testimony at the P & Z meeting last month about his involvement in developing some landscape buffer on his project. The last item is site specific condition 7 where the City Engineer has mentioned the requirements for a common lot for an existing sewer line that traverses along the south boundary of the property. I might point out that sewer line is in place and has been for a few years but there is no easement for it on the property. We would like to request that an easement be established in the plat and not a common lot. The reason being is that we would like to have access for use of that property or possibly fire lanes or maybe future access to rail. So we would like to see an easement there rather than a lot. The other items on the list we concur with and will provide during the final platting stages. If you have any questions I would be glad to entertain those. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 60 Corrie: Council, any questions? Rountree: I have a question, who is going to maintain the landscaping if it is in an easement? Lee: The property owner for the lots. Rountree: Who is going to put the landscaping in? Lee: Well there was a discussion about that at P & Z meeting. I believe the developer would if it was a requirement of the City to do it initially with construction. However the best situation for them would be postponement until the site plan is submitted on Cach of those lots to take care of it at that point. Rountree: That is atl I have. Corrie: Mr. Tolsma? Tolsma: (Inaudible) Lee: I suppose if that is an issue for the city that it can be worked into either the CC&R's or your conditions of approval that a certain type or quantity of landscaping would be required. That is something that the City planning staff could address and (Inaudible) conformity is an issue then certainly I think it can be addressed in some special documents. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Lee: It wasn't the intent to combine the two easements. Realty now that you brought it up it wasn't really a site specific condition on the review and maybe we would like to ask the question is it really required along Locust Grove. If not we just assume not put it in because it is an industrial use. Our initial plan was 20 along Pine and 10 along Locust Grove and then a utility easement along that. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Stiles: I don't remember when we discussed this, Gary came in at our pre-application meeting and the ten foot came up. I don't really remember what I told him about that. It is required on Pine Street because of the residential properties across the street. I am concerned that be in place prior to the rest of that. Prior to any development taking place in there to provide that protection and buffer for those residential properties. It escapes • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 61 u me where the ten foot came from on Locust Grove except that it would be just nice to have. I don't believe it is designated as any type of entrance corridor in the comp plan. Lee: We did talk about the ten feet on Locust Grove and if it is not going to be a requirement then our feeling is we would like not to put it in. Pine street that would be fine and we expect to but it is not required on Locust Grove, we are going to have industrial users on the other side of the street. Stiles: We would require landscaping for each parcel (inaudible) and we have been requiring perimeter landscaping or trying to require perimeter landscaping for these lots in the industrial subdivision. It is real hard to try and get anybody in an industrial subdivision to put any landscaping in. I can't tell you right now except that it would be nice to have. I don't believe that there is a requirement though for anything on Locust Grove. Morrow: Unless we make a requirement. Lee: (Inaudible) that is why it is on the drawing because Shari and I did talk about it. But it didn't come up on the site specific conditions so that is why I posed the question, is it really required. Morrow: If I may offer in terms of what we have been doing because of problems that we have experienced with these very landscaping issues with respect to the easement thing is some months ago we as a Council went to requiring business in industrial parks and developments just to be like the residential in terms of making common lots and a homeowners association if you will, a business owners associations or whatever to take care of it. We have not experienced very good success with the easement method of handling for the reasons that have been stated earlier. I guess it would also ask Gary in terms of your feelings of item 7, the 20 foot sewer easement should be designated as a separate lot by our policy. Your reaction to his, Gary Lee's proposal? Smith: I first of all didn't know that sewer line was the without an easement. It was installed to provide sewer to Layne Industrial Park on Lanark Street I believe so I don't know. Layne did that, as part of their, provide that easement, built that sewer. I don't know why it is not there. Secondly, I have assumed a problem with easements that John Anderson has with easement for sewer for water lines or for irrigation lines. As far as I am concerned if an easement didn't show up again for sewer line that would be just fine. I have real problems with not being able to get to a sewer line because something has been built over it. We have got, I can take you to two buildings and one church that are built over sewer lines. If we have to excavate for that sewer line we can't, we would have to go around the building if we had a problem, easements all three. I don't know what, I can understand this applicant's concern over having an alley there on the back side of these Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 62 industrial lots that is probably not a good idea. I don't know what is a good idea. Being able to get to the sewer line is our requirement, it is our responsibility to maintain that. If we have to go through gate after gate after gate, fence after fence with locks, however it is to be handled I don't know. I am battling the sewer line easement in Tract Subdivision right now that was caused by the developer not doing what he said he was going to do. It is back in our lap to try and resolve it. I am going to resolve it to a certain point but I am not backing off of the requirement that was made to an extent where the City of Meridian has to incur some additional responsibilities to maintain a sewer line. If these sewer lines can be put into areas that are accessible at all times by the City then the development community is going to have to figure out something else as far as Gary Smith is concerned. Morrow: So do you really feel strongly about this? Rountree: Do you have any opinion Gary? Smith: I am gradually forming one. Gary Lee and t did talk about this and I understand the problem with having an alley back there and maybe this isn't the place for me to get on my soap box but I had a chance. Morrow: Thank you, you have answered the question very well. Lee: Could that be a dedicated right of way? Smith: I guess you get into the situation where once you get into a 20 foot accessway how do you get out of it. We need a turn around someplace. We can't, with our hydrocleaner, dragging that thing behind a pick up, it is pretty tough to back it up for that distance 1 would say. So we need to think about doing something else and I don't' know about deed restrictions if that is an alternative or not. Lee: What about granting a use easement to the property owner if it is a common lot? Again like you say you have fence and gate problems. Smith: I don't know how accessible these things would be if we had a plug in the line and we had to access it after normal business hours for the particular lot, can we go about cutting our way through the fence to get in there, I don't know what legally we can do or if that is something that is addressable in a deed restriction. We try to notify the owner if we can't get them and it is an emergency we bull doze the fence and go in and do what needs to be done, If there is a shed built over the line we bull doze that too and the property owner is responsible for putting it back. Lee: Well if you own the lot I guess what I am saying is that the easement will be granted Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 63 to the user and the City would own the lot or have exclusive rights to it in some manner. Smith: So it is kind of a thorny issue with me right at the moment because I am battling this other one too. Crookston: Gary are you going to have requests for variances, I didn't write them all down but at least for the sidewalks and the streets that you wanted to do differently. Lee: Well the sidewalk as I understand is a request for a waiver, not necessarily a variance. And the variance request we have for the next item is for pressure irrigation. Crookston: You had something else, a difference on the streets. Lee: No, not on the streets other than the sidewalk on Ralston and Commercial. We will comply with ACHD requirements on the streets. Crookston: I have it written down here waiver an streets. Lee: I must have mis-worded because there. isn't a waiver on the streets. Crookston: I can't say right now whether or not there is a waiver procedure for sidewalks, I don't believe that is how it is. Lee: Well I think that is how we handled it in Layne Industrial anything that was over 100 feet was a request for a waiver to the City. Is that how we handled that Gary, before, I think it was. Stiles: We waived that requirement in Layne Industrial Park, it does say in the ordinance that the City may waive the requirement for sidewalk on both sides if the lots are over 100 feet. I don't really think in this kind of a subdivision it would serve any purpose to have them on both sides. Crookston: t recall that now from going through Cherry Lane Subdivision, the Lake at Cherry Lane No. 5 there where they wanted sidewalk on one side. Stiles: That was part of their conditional use permit for a planned development. Crookston: I ran into what you are talking about when I was dealing with that. Corrie: Anything else Gary? • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 64 Lee: I don't think so unless there are other questions? Corrie: Thank you Gary, anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony? Seeing none I will Wayne Forrey, 3045 Theyen Place, Boise, was sworn by the Gity attorney. Forrey: Mayor and members of the Council, my wife and I are purchasing just under 13 acres immediately to the west, we border Ron Yanke's property here. So I hope that doesn't have a conflict of interest because I am a neighbor. He is proposing a good development we don't have a problem with it at all. I wanted to re-emphasize am I understanding correctly that the City is requiring Ron Yanke to have a landscape strip where his property touches my property? I gathered from the P & Z Commission (Inaudible) Forrey: That is fine, that is perfect, we intend to fully landscape our side of the property. So I was going to reiterate that it is not necessary to impose that on this project. Corrie: Thank you Wayne, anyone else from the public that would like to offer testimony? Crookston: I would like to ask Mr. Lee a question. And mostly this pertains to the development of Mr. Yanke's property in comparison to what Mr. Forrey's doing, do you know what kind of uses are going to be proposed in there? Lee: Not at this time we don't there are lots in there that will be offered for sale. It will be similar I suppose to what is going on in Layne Industrial. Crookston: Thank you Corrie: Discussion Council? Rountree: The two items, one with respect to the landscape lots being common lots I think we need to make a condition on the preliminary plat. I #hink we need to resolve the sewer easement to a common lot. Other than that I don't have any problem with the preliminary plat. Morrow: I don't either except I would go further to say that t want to waive the five foot walk on both sides of the street, it needs to be just one side in an industrial park. I think for the sake of consistency we continue to do the common lot for landscape purposes. Gary is right about the easement situation with the sewer line thing. It needs to be a common lot Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 65 that can be maintained by the owners association. Corrie: Any further discussion? I will close the public hearing. Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the preliminary plat for Railside Subdivision by Ron Yanke subject to the following conditions, the waiver is granted for the five foot sidewalk on both sides of the street it would be on one side of the street only, that a common lot be required for the sewer line and common lot for landscape purposes to be administered by a business owners association. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma, any discussion? All those in favor? Rountree: I have one comment, do we need to in the motion indicate a preference for when that landscaping is put in like with the initial development? Morrow: I think it needs to be part of the development but in terms of what they did in Layne Industrial Park that has been a real fast project so the landscaping would be as they are cutting dirt they are forming the berm for the dirt for the roadways they form the berm (End of Tape) Rountree: If you are comfortable from experience with that I have no problem. Morrow: Well I am not, if you want to make it part of the requirement that it be, I guess when else would you put it in. It is a common lot, we have addressed the issue in terms of common lot, that should satisfy the requirement for being in and done. Corrie: (Inaudible) Morrow: It is also part of the development agreement in terms of the check list, it is the same as the occupancy permit that is what we'are gravitating towards in the development agreement is just a checklist as opposed to being fairly lengthy (inaudible) Rountree: I am comfortable with your explanation Walt. Corrie: Okay, you have heard the motion and second, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea L' Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 66 • ITEM #15: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION REQUIREMENT FOR RAILSIDE SUBDIVISION BY RON YANKE: Corrie: I will now open the public hearing, is there a representative? Gary Lee, JUB Engineers, 1.750 Summertree, was sworn by the City Attorney. Lee: The request of course is for a variance on the pressure irrigation system in an industrial subdivision. I guess the way we look at this particular project even knowing that we are going to have a Couple of common lots for landscaping on Pine and Locust Grove, I did some quick calculations here we have got 12,000 square feet of landscaping on Locust Grove and about 6,000 scratch that about 12,000 along Pine as well. So that is roughly 1/2 aa'e of landscaping on the project and then if you consider that each individual lot is required to landscape say 10 of the parking area that can equate to about a 1500 to 2000 square foot per lot. So I am coming up with totals of about 26,000 to 30,000 square feet let's say an acre of landscaping on this 23 acre piece of land. The rest of it is going to be covered with about 5 acres of street right of way, parking lots and buildings. So, our contention is that the amount of irrigation required for this 23 acres is minimal and we believe that the request for this variance on pressure irrigation is warranted. If you have any questions I would be glad to entertain those now. Corrie: Any questions? Anybody else from the public that would like issue testimony? Council comments? Morrow: I totally agree with the variance. Corrie: Okay, we will close the public hearing, motion for the variance? Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law for the variance from the pressurized irrigation system for Railside Subdivision by Ron Yanke. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that the attorney draw up findings of facts and conclusions of law for the variance for Railside Subdivision by Ron Yanke, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 67 ITEM #16: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PORKY PARK NO. 1 SUBDIVISION BY RON VAN AUKER: Corrie: I will open the public hearing and invite the representative. Brad Miller, 3084 East Lanark, was sworn by the City Attorney. Miller: My name is Brad Miller I represent Ron Van Auker. Let me first state that the name will be changed, I have had a number of comments on that, it was not meant to offend anyone. Commissioner Oslund took great offense to it and it was not meant in that way at all. As Dave Roylance stated in the Planning and Zoning meeting that Ron Van Auker has an odd sense of humor and I just think that represents his odd sense of humor, but that will be changed. Morrow: Pardon me for the interruption but I really liked it and I would like to see it stay. Miller: Well I will tell you we have an industrial development in Boise that we call Donkey Park and by the way we do not market our subdivisions by the name of the final plat but anyway. So we can change that if you would like. Thy development is on the NE corner of Eagle and Franklin, 64 acres, it has previously been annexed and zoned Light Industrial in the back, general commercial in the front. The lot size we are requesting are for 1.5 acres to 10.5 acres in the back. We will have, provide City water and sewer and the roads will be built to ACRD standards. I have a couple of comments on Shari Stiles site specific comments. I will not ask for a waiver of the common lot on the sewer and on the landscaping I just learned that 1 shouldn't ask for that. So I will ignore those two but on item six of Shari Stiles' comments dated March 11, it says all development within the subdivision is subject to the approval through the conditional use permit process. I would propose that providing we are building or developing buildings that are compatible with the designated zoned and are principle permitted uses I would prefer that we not have to go through the conditional use permit process that it seems to me that is the purpose of zoning is to provide what you can and cannot do within that zoning designated area. I would propose that we not be subject to the conditional use permit in this development. In referring to Bruce Freckleton's comments dated March 6, item 5, he states that, it talks about the sewer main will be extended up Kentfield Way. Then he says the installation of a 12 inch diameter water main wiN be required along the south frontage of this development. What we would propose to do is to run the water main down Lanark and then come up in a similar area to the sewer to Franklin providing the to and through or complying with the to and through principle and stubbing out the water line at Franklin at Kentfield Way or one or more locations. The way I read this, I am reading it to say that the 12 inch line will be run along the entire frontage, Franklin frontage of the property which is roughly a 1/4 mile. It would seem to me that would be a little bit excessive and we can Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 68 • provide the same access to the water line by stubbing it out there at Franklin. The people on the other side of Franklin could access it there. I would also request that since this is alight industrial development that we also request a waiver of the sidewalks on both sides so we could just put it on one side. That concludes my comments, I would be available for questions. Dave Roylance the engineer is also here and available for questions you may have. Bentley: In referring to the P & Z's #8, how will Lot 2 Block 1 be accessed? Miller Good question, what we would do is Mr. Berg do we have the map here the site plan, (inaudible) it would be accessed, there would be a small frontege road running along Lot 1 on the Eagle Road side, not accessing Eagle Road, we would access it from there or either there or coming between Lots 1 and 4 to access Lot #1 end have a common driveway of some sort. Corrie: Any further questions? Anyone else from the public that would like to enter testimony at this time? Pat Nations, 4010 East Franklin Road, was sworn by the City Attorney. Nations: My property borders this subdivision that is going in the industrial, on the east side. At our last meeting at the last time, Mr. Ballantyne made a lot of comments that I totally agreed with and agree with but I have some extra concerns that being as my property is up against this subdivision going in that I am a little concerned with. I have my residence there and also I have a horse breeding farm and what I, I just, what I would like to do is I am going to read this because I am not real good at talking. So if you don't mind Mayor and Councilman I will read what I have here. Some of these issues have already been taken care of. Especially the first one but I am going to read it anyway. I am one of the concerned citizens and residents Mr. Ballantyne referred to in an earlier meeting. I fully support his concerns for the citizens and residents of this community about the aesthetics and qualities of the entryway into our town and Meridian. I also have some additional concerns since my property is adjacent to the Porky Park subdivision and I am may say I do not like the name. It is not offensive, there is just some#hing about it. Anyway,. the previous owner Mr. Mayes used to keep the land really groomed nicely because he farmed it all of the time. I did have a real fear last time of fire which we happen to get this year quite badly. But the Mr. Van Auker has taken care of that it has been totally plowed, everything is very nicely done and I am very pleased with that. I thank them for that. What I would like to do is since it is my home and I have my farm with all of my horses there I am asking for some commitments, some written commitments if you please. I am asking that an 8 foot solid barrier wall be built along the entire length of my property. Preferably not wood, because it is easy to break through. But something that can be maintained very • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 69 nicely that is solid. The barrier wall could be made with partly a berm and fence of some sort. I would like this to be 10 to 20 feet which I understand it is going to be anyway with the easement there that they are going to put in, landscaping, that I understand is going to be done. I just want to be sure a proper fence is put along there that will ensure my privacy and a sound barrier for me against the industrial park that is going in. I would like to request setbacks from the back lot lines sufficient enough to ensure my privacy. I would like to request also and I would like these in written commitments if you please. I would like to have tum out lanes into the subdivision going both directions so that the traffic will not pile up in front of my place so that I have easy access going in and out with my horse trailer and stuff. It is getting pretty crowded now with Eagle and the road there like it is with the new things going in. I would like to see, there needs to be a noise restriction so as not to disturb by brood mares and mares with the babies particularly in the evenings, from evening to mornings. I would like to see no night work, no shift work of loud nature to assure the residents of the single family homes in the area of quiet evenings and good night sleeps. I also would like to know, this is something that I would like to know what is going to happen with the drainage ditches in the back. Some of the people, I do have mine fenced off I have got a hot wire going across it so they don't drink out of it. There are animals that do drink out of it and there is a little wildlife back there, dicks and geese and things like that. We just kind of want to know, or I do anyway I don't know who else does what is going to happen with the drainage ditches, are they going to be left like it is or is it going to be, nothing hazardous being put in it and stuff like that. I just want to be sure it is not going to be contaminated that way. I have no problem with the industrial park being put in there as long as it is looking nice. I do have this written up I would like to present it and have it put in the file. That is all I have to say. Are there any questions? Corrie: Thank you, anybody else from the public that would like to give testimony? Guy Valentine, 2770 East Franklin Road, was sworn by the City Attorney. Valentine: I would also like to say that development is just right off Franklin Road and that I would ask the Mayor and Council members to require conditional use permits for that area because it is a designated entryway corridor to the City of Meridian. It is very highly viewed by visitors, residents. What would be the big rush as far as, we don't have a problem with the development but it is going to be there for years and years to come and if we go ahead and get some guarantees from the developers .then I think, that it could be something that we could be proud of for the rest of our days in the future also. So I would just ask that we go ahead and require the conditional use process because we would want to have developments on the same level as St. Luke's Meridian. They are very community conscious and they have done a first class development and I think that sort of development should be a target for us all to strive for. If they are not prepared to put forth efforts to maintain that type of a standard then I think that there is a problem somewhere. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 70 That is just about all I have to say. Are there any questions? Corrie: Thank you Mr. Valentine. Anybody else from the public that would like to give testimony? Dave Roylance, 4619 Emerald, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Roylance: Mr. Mayor and City Council, I represent the developer and owner, I also would like to request that you reconsider the requirement for a conditional use permit for each and every building. tt just seems too cumbersome, to me it also seems to undo the whole concept of zoning. As I believe that a conditional use permit requires a public hearing for each and every building and if that is true than that just seems like a tremendous burden to put a developer through. If you are concerned about the quality of the project or the building and the landscaping, couldn't that be done with the design review process as part of the building permit and wouldn't that accomplish the same objective? The other thing would be irrigation, I don't think that I read in the requirements that irrigation is pressurized irrigation as part of this proposal, is that a requirement of the City does anybody know? It is, we do then have to submit a formal variance. I think we would seek an appeal for the same reason as stated in the previous application. And I would assume that if we did that it would be supported for the same reasons in the previous applications. We probably will file that variance. That is all I have. Corrie: Questions from Council? Rountree: I have a couple of questions on the preliminary plat. ACHD comments (inaudible) in terms of set back requirements. They are looking at 45 feet from centerline on their faalities and they're requesting 60 feet from centerline at the intersection of Eagle and Franklin. Roylance: I intend to comply with that, I didn't change the plat .because it was a given that we will do that. I did meet at their tech review, we did review those requirements and we agreed to do that. We intended to do that at the final plat stage. There were some other things that they required too, an extension of the street and a few other things. I intend to comply with all ACRD requirements. Crookston: Mr. Roylance in regard to the comment I think that Brad Miller made about the extension of the sewer and water but he indicated that he was in discussion with Bruce Freckleton's comments #5 which is a sewer main shown on Kentfield shall be extended to Franklin Road for future extension access. Are you aware that the City requires sewer and water to be extended to the farthest outlying boundary of the property? • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 71 Roylance: Yes I am and I think 1 would have to, I am not exactly sure of the formula or how you arrive at the to and through, what satisfies that requirement. I am aware of that and (inaudible) satisfy this requirement if I understand the formula. (Inaudible) I think the to and through intent as I understand it (inaudible) which would mean if this property developed (inaudible) therefore it would seem like (inaudible) that would meet the to and through requirement. Further it seems like (inaudible) none of these people would have made a con#ribution to (inaudible) and that has I think some concerns and I don't know that the developer recoups very well (inaudible) by doing it this way we deliver the (inaudible) Crookston: I don't know that (inaudible) Gary Smith, I just wanted to raise the point the City ordinances do require it to be extended to and through. Roylance (Inaudible) I guess in my opinion extended it to here (inaudible) Crookston: That would have to be gone over with Gary Smith but I think your thinking is to and through does include as far east as your property goes in some fashion. Roylance: (Inaudible) Currie: Mr. Rountree, did you have any further questions? Any further questions from Council? Any further testimony from the public? Council, discussion? Morrow: I would like to hear some comments from the staff in response to the issues that were raised by Mr. Roylance, Mr. Miller and Ms. Nations Mr. Valentine? Currie: Do you want to be specific or just general comments to what they had? Morrow: I would just like to hear Shari's general comments and Gary's general comments, probably more on his side from a technical stand point in terms of the issue for the water and the sewer. But Shari in terms of the other issues like screening and fencing and so on and so forth. Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council, in my comments I was probably remiss when I did not address Pat Nations' property as far as having a landscape setback, I do believe that should be required and we should even consider the 8 foot wall. When this property was annexed getting to the pressurized irrigation thing, the property that had just received the variance had been in the City, for years and years and years and is not subject to all of the requirements that this development is. When this property was annexed it very specifically stated that they must meet the pressurized irrigation requirement. It also very specifically requires any use on the property will be developed as a commercial and industrial planned development or under the conditional use permit • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 72 process. These were all things that were accepted by the applicant when they annexed the property and I don't see any reason to relax those requirements. Do you have any questions, I can get you copies of these findings Morrow: My question is with respect to, in terms of that the conditional use or Stiles: Or they can develop the entire thing as a commercial or industrial planned development which means they would do the whole thing at one time or at least a portion of it at one time. Which would not, so they wouldn't have to do each individual building but. Morrow: As I recall when that annexation was done there were several parts of the annexation is that not correct. Stiles: Yes Morrow: And some of them were specifically exempted from the conditional use process primarily because in the building and leasing of buildings the process takes 30 to 45 days in which case the tenant is long gone because they have no assurance that they can even rent the space. This portion of the annexation was done for either the conditional use or the commercial planned development, is that what you are telling us? Stiles: Yes, this was, this annexation was done, was it all that 70 acres that was done at one time? This included all of the Van Auker annexation, all of that property that was annexed at one time that would even include the technological parcel, it was zoned technological but previously included the school site. It applied to everything they annexed. This was not part of the St. Luke's annexation. Morrow: I understand that. Gary, your response to the water and sewer issues please? Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, we've had a policy on these frontage roads to extend the utilities in the roadways that are adjacent to the projects. It is true what the applicant and his engineer have said that as far as benefit to this project is concerned and in this particular case there are opportunities for the water line to loop through- this project and connect out Eagle in two locations. The late comers agreement process is available to the applicant for people that would connect to this line at a future date. Either to the south or to the east. We just recently went through another one that you might remember Gemtone Subdivision off of Eagle Road, we are required to install a 12 inch water line on Pine of which they are building half of 12 feet for the length of their subdivision. Once again they have requested a late comers agreement. The internal part of their subdivision can be served by the internal street system that contains water lines but in that particular Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 73 L~ case again that water line serves as a loop which is a more reliable system for any development. Particularly the commercial and industrial developments that have the higher fire flow requirements then the residential. But that has basically been our policy in the past years to get the water lines installed as the streets are constructed or as the developments are in place. Sewer lines, in fact the preliminary plat that I am looking at that we received on the 12th of March shows the water line in Franklin Road from Eagle Road to its east boundary. Sewer line does stub out on Kentfield Way and we felt that was adequate to provide access to the properties to the sou#h side of Franklin Road. Which would include a portion of the Bews project that you have seen some concept plans on or a concept plan. Does that, did I cover your question Councilman? Morrow: Yes you did. Corrie: No further testimony from the public? Okay, I will close the public hearing. Rountree: I guess my position on this is there are some fairly significant issues that need to be resolved and need to be on the plat. I would like to see them resolved before we take any further action on this. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Con'ie: Is it in agreement with the Council I wilt re-open the public hearing so you can take testimony on that point if that is your desire. I will have to open the public hearing back up if you are going to be taking any testimony from anybody. Morrow: I don't know that I am taking testimony, what I would like to see here is a list of all of the issues that were not on the plat. We have the technical issues with respect to the sewer and water line, I don't see those issues that there would be testimony on. We have got the requirement that normally is on plats that requires a landscape separation between a subdivision or change in use which is that would be qn the eastern boundary that would need to show on the plat. I think Shari's point is well taken that has been overlooked, So I think those are technical details in terms of the staff getting that put together for the plat. I don't know that there is an issue that would need to be heard for the public. I guess from my perspective is that there are too many issues to make a motion on tonight and get those all incorporated in the motion. Corrie: Counselor? Crookston: I don't' see any problem with keeping the public hearing open so that is made a part of the public hearing. Any evidence it is submitted whether it just on the City requirements or anything else. There are no findings required for this, so I don't know it Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 74 is a critical it would be if there were findings required. I see nothing wrong with having the public hearing left open so that whatever is submitted is on the record. That is the Council's decision. Corrie: I think if there was anymore discussion among the Council it would still have to be open to the public. So I guess they can make it either way. Rountree: Well we could move to continue the hearing for the resolution of the issues that have been raised this evening, the technical issues with the city staff. Defer decision on the preliminary plat until our next regularly scheduled meeting which is May 21st. Morrow: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow, any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #17: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 14 ACRES TO I-L FOR OLSON BUSH NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY R-2 DEVELOPMENT: Corrie: I will open the public hearing. Brad Miller, 3084 East Lanark, was sworn by the City Attorney. Miller: This is a 14 acre subdivision at the end of Lanark that we are proposing to divide into nine lots. We are asking for a light industrial zoning. I have once again we will bring in city sewer and city water and build the roads to ACRD standard. I have three brief comments, number one would be Shari Stiles' item 3 on her March 11 memo referring to the annexation of other lots that are on the streets which are not owned by R-2 development. She specifically refers to Ron Yanke's lots on the south side of East Lanark, I don't have any control over those lots, I don't have any control over the adjoining lot that is owned by Ted Sigmont or the lot on the north side of the street by Ted Centers. I have talked to Mr. Yanke's representative Mike Ford about annexation and he is not opposed to it. I don't know if the way Shari has worded this in her comments if it is a condition of approval or not but I would like to just state that I don't have any control over whether or not they choose to annex their lots into the City. Item #7 on the same memo from Shari Stiles address the requirement that there be a conditional use permit procedure for each procedure for each of these lots. I would ask that this not be a requirement. Once again we are asking for light industrial zoning it is our preference is that if we are building Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 75 buildings if approved uses within that designated zoning, would we not be subject to the conditional use permit process. Finally I would ask once again for a waiver of the requirement that sidewalks be on both sides of the street that we just put sidewalks on one side of the street since it is an industrial development. Those are my comments I would be more than happy to address any questions. Once again Dave Roylance is here to address any questions you may have. Corrie: Council? Any other public testimony? Guy Valentine, 2770 East Franklin Road, was sworn by the City Attorney. Valentine: What I am asking for particularly has to do with the comprehensive plan in Meridian and the Zoning and development requirements, ordinances. What kind of guarantees do the seven residential property owners who overlook this planned development have to see to it that these developers are going to adhere to the zoning and development ordinances? I would like to see the conditional use process enforced here because there are only nine lots and otherwise we don't have any guarantees and what enforcement will the City Council have, what enforcement power will they have to make sure that everything is complied with. Yes it is zoned light industrial, we have seen what can happen to the area if you have been out there, you have seen the Olson Bush No. 1 development from Eagle Road. There is no screening and there is a lot of storage areas that are there and what not. I believe Ron Yanke's property should also conform to those ordinances as you requested. He also requested for an annexation into the City. When we are going to look at the results for the rest of our lives what is the rush? Why should we have to submit to these developers agenda to rush through the process just because it has been zoned light industrial. We have to have some guarantees the residents of the area. Many of the people along the Franklin Road area are retired, they spend a lot of time at home looking down at their view. We have a wonderful view there, he we are going to sell our property that is going to affect the value of our property. I would like to (inaudible) I was just wondering if in your recommendations of findings of fact and conclusions of law (Inaudible) what about the remaining portions of the lateral? (inaudible) There is no mention of this area, what is it (inaudible) (End of Tape) My concern is that this area here has been when they developed these lots here, why have they stopped at this point. In the future do they plan on extending these lots and if so, I just think that there is a question here about this area here and whether or not there is going to be any future development. I would like to have the full Snyder lateral that is still going to remain in the open (inaudible) as well as the portion that boundaries the property. Community identification policy 1.4 states major entrances to the City should be enhanced and emphasized. Under the zoning and development ordinances that ordinance 430, 2-14C says outdoor storage of commercial and industrial materials will be screened from all existing adjoining residents or residentially zoned areas whether or not such property is separated by an alleyway or Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 76 street. So screening and that sort of thing of storage areas and parking lots is a concern of mine. I would like to have some kind of guarantee as to whether or not the Council will be able to enforce the zoning and development type ordinances. Under the, I believe that we have vested rights and according to the City of Meridian's definitions in the zoning and development ordinances vested rights are properly used refer to the rights that have ben accrued to an individual as a result of conditions that have existed for a period of time. Light manufacturing's definition is industrial uses which are usually controlled operations relatively clean, quiet and free of objectionable or hazardous elements such as smoke, nose odor, dust, which operate and store within enclosed structures and which generate little industrial traffic and no nuisances. I would like the Council to address what kind of guarantees that I have that just whatever has been put on the books is going to be adhered to. I am not asking for anything that hasn't been put forth already by the City. I just want a guarantee of some kind and that is why I have asked for the conditional use process to take place and since there are only nine lots involved I don't see why that would be a major problem. I don't think that we should have to conform to the developers agenda when we have St. Luke's Meridian putting in a first class operation. We have got the other developments, I forget the other development down on Eagle Road that is doing a first class development. Why we should not have a high standard for that area. It is a real fast developing area. It is very beautiful and I think it would, like I say it is an entryway corridor, designated entryway corridor. It is very noticeable and I think we should give that area, that whole area a little bit of time and considQration. Even though it is major developers and they have a lot of influence in this area. I think that we should think long term about this. I would like to see as many screening areas and also buffer zones, transitional yards if possible. Behind my house there I want that to be designated something that some kind of requirements that state that the property that they do not own is, I just want them to address what their future ideas are for that property if they have any future plans for that property. I would like also the developers that are here now to stand up and talk about tiling of the ditch if they would be interested in doing such a thing. If they would be interested in giving a guarantee that the zoning and development ordinances will be complied with. I would like to have them stand up here and say something about that specifically since I have sat here all night long and I have stood up here and I have given my ideas I would like to have them address those specific things in the hearing. That is all I have to say. Bentley: I don't have a question but I don't see how you can require the developer to tell what is going to happen land that- he doesn't own. On that portion you speak of to the south there he really has no control over what it is going to happen with that since he doesn't own it. Valentine: Well I can ask him and he can answer what he has in mind for it. If he has no future plans for that then I would like to know whether or not he does. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 77 Bentley: Well he just stated that he doesn't own it. So how can he have plans for it? Valentine: I would like to have him address as many as my concerns as possible. My feeling is that they haven't done so. I want guarantees and I would Like guarantees, I would like to have him stand up and address some of these issues. I have spent my time to come down here and be involved as a concerned property owner and also concerned community member. I want not only for myself but for the community to have these things addressed. That is all I am asking for. Corrie: Is there further testimony from the public? Dave Roylance, 4619 Emerald, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Roylance: Regarding the conditional use permit, I did think that is an unnecessary burden. I think it undoes zoning regulations. I think when you have a certain zone you have principle permitted uses within the zone can go forward without a public hearing. I think it is burdensome and unfair to the developer and probably burdensome to the City. I think if you need those protections I think we can support that. I think there is a simpler way to do it. One of them might be I believe you are going to require a development agreement: In the development agreement I think you can require a staff level design review process as a part of the building permit process. In there you can require landscaping, screening, building materials and so forth. So I do think that the same objectives can be met without the cumbersome process of a public hearing on each and every building in the project. Regarding the ditches, we intend to the every ditch in the project in accordance with Meridian City Ordinance any ditch off the property we don't ,intend to tile. Again the property just confirmed it with Mr. Miller, he doesn't own that property that was referenced by Mr. Valentine, he doesn't have an option on it, he doesn't have any plans on it. WE thought it somewhat rude to submit a preliminary plat on it so we didn't. That is all I have. Corrie: Any questions from Council? Any other members from the public? Janette Fletcher, 2730 East Franklin Road, was sworn by the City Attorney. Fletcher: I thought that they were going, the last time we were here was late also that they were going to address the fact of the good stuff that is laying out in the field that shines in my eyes. All of the garbage or whatever that is down by Marcum's now, that was a question last time and I thought we were supposed to come and get an answer about cleaning that mess up or something. (Inaudible) Berg: I was just going to make a comment, that property isn't in the City but I believe Jim Rabitt did make some contact with Ada County to have their people go and look at it. They Meridian City Councif May 7, 1996 Page 78 are the ones that have to force that land that is the to the north of your property that is in that other portion of the subdivision No. 1. I am pretty sure that Jim made some contacts with the people he contacted on a daily basis with the County to go look at it. I do not know what the results of those were but I did talk to him about it after the meeting at the P & Z level. Fletcher: If they leave that stuff like that the whole thing is going to be an eye sore. It is just horrible and that is part of my concern. And then, we are kind of in accordance with Mr. Valentine that we want a nice area and we don't want to be blocked out and look at a bunch of garbage. We have lived there for the last 30 years. Corrie: Thank you, any further testimony from the public? Valentine: I would like to ask Mr. Roylance if they intend to the any portion of that ditch that boundaries their property and also if he will commit himself to following the zoning and development ordinances in the staff level review process that he recommended rather than having the conditional use permit process. Is he willing to state that yes that staff level will they adhere to all of the things that is required by the City in the zoning and development ordinances. I would like to ask him to address that issue specifically rather than just the zoning issue. Also, if, what portion of the Snyder lateral are they going to tile? Corrie: Thank you, do you want to answer that at this time, those two questions? Roylance: Again, I am the engineer not the developer, we would the any ditch within our property boundaries that is required to be tiled per Meridian City code. We would the nothing outside of our property perimeters. Regarding the zoning ordinance and any other rules, yes it has been my experience that when developers come in and work with the City that they do adhere to the zoning requirements and their building code requirements. That is what I would expect would happen here. I will say sometimes that is a negotiated process where you meet with the staff member and you talk about landscaping and you talk about this and there is a little bit of give and take. But typically it ends in a win win situation and the City gets reasonably what they want. That is what I would envision the process to be here. In that process I would say that the developer would adhere to the zoning rules and regulations and requirements of the City. Any questions? Corrie: Anybody else from the public? That is it, we go back and forth and we will never get out of here tonight. Council, discussion? Rountree: Well as far as the annexation goes, the way I read the conditions in the findings of fact and conclusions which have been available to the public since March 12, they have addressed in the conditions most of the issues that have been brought forth tonight. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 79 Specifically that this development would be subject to the conditional use process. That tiling of ditches would be required on the property within the subdivision. All of the ordinances of the City of Meridian would have to be abided by to the tune of some 20 pages. I didn't find anything in reviewing that that would be inconsistent with what we have heard tonight. Crookston: I don't believe so. Morrow: You don't think there has been new testimony as to mandated changes to the findings of fact and conclusions? Crookston: I do not. Corrie: Any further discussion Council members? Morrow: I want to discuss a little be the conditional use permit requirement. I guess I want to discuss it from this standpoint. This particular location is different than the former location that we talked about from the standpoint that there are county uses within their ground. It is not zoned and annexed within the City. Obviously it is not subject to the conditional use process. It is a nine lot subdivision, most everything to the east I am sorry to the west of Eagle Road is not subject to the conditional use process. Again I would suggest to you that in terms of building buildings for a specific client or more importantly building buildings for potential lease clients conditional use permit process doesn't work very well for lease buildings. It doesn't work very well to re-lease buildings when somebody's lease expires because of the length of the process. I note here under our economic development goal statement policy of the City of Meridian shall make every effort to create a positive atmosphere which encourages industrial and commercial enterprise to locate in Meridian. It is a policy of the City of Meridian to set aside areas for commercial and industrial interest and activities (inaudible) character site improvements and type of new commercial or industrial development should be harmonized with natural development and respect the unique needs or features of the area. I think that can be accomplished by having covenants and restrictions within the subdivision that begins to develop the assurances that the landscaping issues are covered, the neighbor issues are somewhat covered and taken care of. I think that by and large what can happen with the conditional use permit process especially in buildings that are designed for lease is that the net affect of that may very well be that you get buildings that sit vacant for a long time because nobody that is a tenants is willing to wait the 30 or 45 days that it takes just to get a conditional use permit approved particularly when the zoning and development ordinance specifies the uses that can be done within the zone and their use is a conforming use within the zone. So I think that from my perspective I have a problem with the conditional use permit process from a practical standpoint. In a zoned area where the Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 80 uses are defined and by virtue of the annexation of the subdivision-you can create covenants and restrictions with conditions upon the plat that address perimeter landscaping and those kinds of things. Those are my thoughts. f~ountree: The buffering I believe is covered in the findings of fact as well an additional caveat here that it is concluded that upon annexation and conditions of annexation the City may impose restrictions that are not otherwise contained in the current zoning and subdivision ordinance because of the annexation after the comprehensive plan passage. So that is an additional restriction that can be imposed (inaudible). Mr. Mayor, I would like to here staff s comments with respect to conditional use, I know that is an issue. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, the conditional use process is very cumbersome and time consuming, however I believe it will give us a lot more control than dealing site specific with these people. These people will come back and argue and argue every point you try to make in the site plan. I would think if there is no conditional use you will see just as many people coming back in here wanting to appeal what staff has requested of them because they feel it is out of line. So I guess that is one reason that I like the conditional use permit is because it does go before Council, there is a ruling by Council and they approve a development they see exactly what they are getting. In the light industrial zone there are recycling plants, there is a solid waste transfer station. There are any number of things that are not going to fit with what the neighbors thinks that the Council decided. I am then going to get all the neighbors calling me saying why is this happening why did this happen. That is my only concern as far as not requiring any conditional use. That is how the annexation was done, the findings of fact required that. I know that the comp plan does encourage economic development that we should encourage people to come but Meridian is in a position now, we are not begging for people to come here, Meridian is the place to be. Whatever is going to go in that development is going to be there for a long time. It is gong to set a precedent and it is going to remain in that character for years and years and years. So I think that there is nothing wrong with requiring conditional use permits and expecting a little higher class than has been accepted. in the past just for sake of letting someone in that employs someone. I am not against economic development I am not against anybody trying to make money it is just I think that they should be required to set a higher standard than has been accepted in the pasta Corrie: Any other comments from staff? Tolsma: I am kind of inclined to agree with Shari, we have been (inaudible) we also have some very class act developers that you can take then at their word and they will develop what they are supposed (inaudible) right way. The unscrupulous developer is what makes the scrupulous developers pay. This is where the conditional use permit Walt probably is against, Shari has some valid points. That there are people out there that use the City Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 81 to the fullest extent and nick pick the comprehensive plan and they nick pick everything. We say (inaudible) some people who want to do (inaudible) no problems but you have other guys (inaudible) can't seem to get their act together. It is a valid point the conditional use permit because it does allow you to see what is going to happen (inaudible) and if they don't conform to conditional uses they are out of business because we simply shut them down. But if you don't have that you don't have any control. Corrie: Any further comments from the Council? Crookston: I just have a comment, I believe that in the comprehensive plan that this area is in a mixed use plan area that is why the findings state what they do, it is very close in my mind, Shari is shaking her head now, it may not be, it is not then (inaudible) may not apply. It was hard for me to determine actually where the land did lie in relationship to the generalized land use map plan. Stiles: This area is shown as light industrial on the comprehensive plan map. The text speaks more to the area, this whole area of Franklin. Maybe that is what you were looking at when you were preparing the findings. Crookston: That is what I felt that it was, it was hard to determine as far as the land use map exactly where it was. There are things in the plan that indicate that that whole area is a mixed use plan area. Morrow: A couple more thoughts with respect to this concept, we have a zoning and development ordinance that in it it states in terms of all uses what are permitted and what are conditional uses we have done some modification to that and it has not been through the formal adoption process. The other thing that impacts here is that you have a situation that is (inaudible) light industrial if that is the case why are we not making everything within the City of Meridian conditional use. The point is that we have the potential to bury our staff and bury ourselves in conditional uses. Every time a building is released do we do a conditional use. I think that we think those things through from the standpoint of how to make the thing work and work efficiently. I understand what Ron's point is about bad developers. Probably 90% of our codes and ordinances and laws are written for the bad. Which comprise maybe 10% of our population and negatively affects the other 90% of us. So, it looks to me like we need to think this through and see what we are doing not only in the short term but in the long term to our staff and our staff requirements or staffing requirements. I have nothing further. Corrie: Any other comments from Council? Rountree: I just have an observation based on my limited experience at this point but it ~, Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 82 seems to me that most everything that we have acted on in the past few months in terms of developments have required a conditional use process. Primarily because we have no design review control, we don't. I agree with Ron, I think it is a control we can impose, it doesn't necessarily have to be a burdensome process. Morrow: Well you are going to have to redesign the process then not to make it a burdensome process, the time factor makes it a burdensome process now. Rountree: But even a design review process with staff is going to take considerable time. Morrow: Can't you do the same thing by covenants and restrictions within the subdivision? Rountree: Through development agreement Morrow: Yes through development agreement or requirement of those things that you want to see happen in the subdivision happen. I guess the question is how far do you take this, do you limit buildings to single stories, do you limit exterior materials. Do you provide top screening and certainly the argument can be made for the folks that live on Franklin Road that the normal six foot screening fence does absolutely nothing for them because they sit 30 feet above it they look down into it. So where is the Fine? Rountree: Well given those is it something the staff can deal with? Morrow: I don't know Morrow: Yes we can go either way as a Council with it, but again it is legal counsel and staff is going to have to effect whatever decision it is we make. The conditional use process is something they can get a hold of. Maybe it isn't burdensome to them in terms of enforcement and getting development that is compatible particularly in this situation I see where you are coming from but I am a little hesitant with adjacent residential and light industrial without some pretty good controls one what can go into that light industrial complex. If it were in a commercial industrial quarter section of whatever I would be real inclined to agree with what you are saying. Morrow: Well I think generally speaking the original concept for conditional uses was for old town Meridian because it defied zoning because of all of the stuff that is within a half mile radius of the this building. The concept that we use the railroad corridor to create a light industrial area or commercial area if you will was a broad general concept that was subscribed to. So at some point the zoning and development ordinance was adopted that spelled out the uses that were permitted and conditional uses within those zoning classifications. It looks to me like when you conditional use everything then obviously you • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 83 need to change those classifications so that everything is reflected as a conditional use. At that point whether something is light industrial or medium or whatever it might be if it is all going to be if it all going to be conditional use it doesn't make a lot of sense to have classifications. Rountree: Philosophically Ican't disagree with this particular situation, I can see that you have two uses that can be compatible but can be very incompatible. Morrow: I would think if that were the case then (inaudible) conditional use. Rountree: (Inaudible) Morrow: I am talking about the stuff on Lanark. Rountree: (Inaudible) well Lanark is by virtue (inaudible) Morrow: Layne Industrial Park is not conditional use. I don't believe that the rest of the property west of Eagte Road and north of this property is conditional use. (inaudible) to Blue Cross. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Morrow: Well Ron, everything to the north of this is all industrial and the property immediately to the south is not even owned by the applicant. Tolsma: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: What I am suggesting to you on this particular property that we are talking, there is another piece of property between this property and the residences that we are talking about. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Morrow: Which place is that? Tolsma: (Inaudible) Morrow: Well the revision committee that Bob and I served on specifically changed all of that to conditional use permit only for that type of use. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 84 Tolsma: (Inaudible) Morrow: Well the study that we did we assigned what was to be a conditional use and what was to be a permitted use in the light industrial zone. The concrete processing facility was assigned to be a conditional use it was automatic conditional use. If somebody was trying to do that (inaudible) we didn't have to make everything for that lot a conditional uses which is what we are trying to do now. Whether it would be an office building or a concrete plant the scenario that we are working on right now is it requires a conditional use for everything. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Morrow: What I am suggesting to you is that you need to be fair for two things to happen. It will radically slow down the sales and re-lease or re-sale of buildings and two it will increase the amount of work that this body has got to do at some point time fairly substantially in dealing with conditional use permits unless you figure out some way to stream line the process. Here it is already it is five minutes after one and we have more than enough to do now. Rountree: Well we have lots of opinions here (inaudible). Corrie: I will close the public hearing, entertain a motion. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that the Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these findings of fact and conclusions as prepared by the Meridian Planning, and Zoning Commission for Olson Bush Industrial Park No. 2. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion is made and seconded that we approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission for the Olson Bush No. 2 subdivision, any further discussion? Roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Nay, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: 1 Nay, 3 Yea Corrie: Conditions and recommendation? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I recommend that the City Council of Meridian approve the annexation for the requested subdivision and zoning under the conditions set forth in the • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 85 findings of fact and conclusions of law including that the applicant must enter into a development agreement as required herein and if the applicant does not do so that the land be de-annexed. That if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings of fact and conclusions and is not agreeable with entering into a development agreement the property should not be annexed. Corrie: Motion has been made on the recommendation, is there a second? Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Tolsma, any discussion? Crookston: I think that there was an error in the findings, it is in the conclusion #17 says the way it reads now is it is concluded that the land should be annexed and zoned f5ut not subject to deannexation if a development agreement is not entered into. If you refer then down to paragraph 18 it states that it is concluded that the annexation and zoning of the property would be in the best interest of the City of Meridian but it is concluded that the property may be deannexed if appropriate development agreements are not agreed on and executed by the City. I think the not in paragraph 17 needs to be stricken out. That reads directly in conflict with what paragraph says. (Inaudible) Crookston: It is in paragraph 16, the not in the second to the last sentence in paragraph 16 I think should be deleted. Rountree: I withdraw my motion. Tolsma: I withdraw my second Rountree: Mr. Mayor, 1 move that the Meridian City Council adopts and approves the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by Planning and Zoning and amended on page 18, item 16 for the Olson Bush Industrial Park No. 2. Corrie: You are removing the word not? Rountree: I am removing the last of the last sentence of paragraph 16 but not subject to denannexation if a development agreement is not entered into. Crookston: I think all we need to do is remove the not. C~ Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 86 (Inaudible) Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the findings of fact and conclusions by Planning and Zoning with the amendment that the word not be removed on page 18, paragraph #16. Any further discussion? Roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Nay, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: 1 Nay, 3 Yea Corrie: I guess the recommendation. Rountree: I move for the .previous recommendation as stated. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made and seconded that it be approved, any further discussion? All those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: 1 Nay, 3 Yea Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move we have the City Attorney prepare an ordinance for this annexation and zoning. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma that the annexation ordinance be prepared by the City Attorney, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #18: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OLSON BUSH N0.2 BY R-2 DEVELOPMENT: Corrie: I will open the public hearing, is there a representative from Olson Bush? Brad Miller, 3084 East Lanark, was sworn by the City Attorney. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 87 Miller: No further comments other than we would like to divide it into 9 separate lots. If there are any questions? Corrie: Questions from Council? Rountree: One question, question from staff indicating that Lanark should be extended west. Miller: Correct, ACHD has requested that this be extended here and we are agreeable to that and we will be doing, the final plat will reflect that. Dave can address that. Corrie: Any further questions? Other public testimony? Dave Roylance, 4619 Emerald, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney/ Roylance: I am aware of this requirement from ACRD to extend the road. WE would like to go on record that we intend to do that so that there is no miscommunication or misunderstanding Iwill alter the preliminary plat and turn it into Gary Smith so that he knows the configuration. I am just saying that so that in hopes that we don't have to redo this again. That was the only issue only significant issue from ACRD. Rountree: Another note that should probably ought to be on the plat is requiring vegetative buffer on the south edge of the south lots, lots 10, 9, 8,7 and I assume you will have two more lots at the other end. That would be it, that is in the findings of fact. Roylance: I can add that by means of a note on here. Rountree: I think that would be helpful (inaudible) Roylance: And resubmit to Gary Smith with a letter that this is our new preliminary plat and maybe suggest that we don't have to revisit this if there are no other concerns. Corrie: It will be ten lots rather than nine is that correct? (Inaudible) Roylance: That is right it would be. Corrie: Any further questions from Council? Anybody else from the public that, would like to enter their testimony at this time? Council, discussion? I will close the public hearing. Entertain a motion. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 88 Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we recommend approval on the preliminary plat for Olson Bush No. 2 Subdivision conditioned on meeting all the conditions of ACRD, staff and comments tonight, Lanark Street be continued to the west and a note be added to the plan to indicate the buffer plantings on the southern lots of the subdivision. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, is there a second? Tolsma: Second Corrie: Second by Mr. Tolsma, is there any discussion? All those in favor of the motion? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #19: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BALLANTYNE TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK BY JIM BALLANTYNE: Corrie: I invite the representative from the business park. Wayne Forrey, 3045 Thayen Place, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Forrey: Mayor and Council I have a letter that I would like to read into the public record, it is dated yesterday the 7th of May. It is addressed to the Mayor and Council on my letterhead. You may have a copy in front of you. Do you want me to read it into the record. Basically Jim and I have been working with Hoff Lumber Company to make the alignment work into the Ballantyne property to make sure it doesn't hurt Hoff Company. We have reached an agreement but I didn't have time to make that change on the plat and get it to City staff. I think Shari has always asked for it by Thursday at noon and I just didn't' get it by last Thursday at noon. So I would ask that we table it for two weeks we will be next week or this week if possible with City staff, show those plat changes and make sure it meets with, I think we have addressed all of the concerns, but we just haven't had that staff review and then come back on your agenda two weeks if that is alright, and also for the next item ort the findings of fact on the annexation as well. Both items 19 and 20. if we could defer for two weeks we would appreciate that. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we table both items 19 and- 20 until May 21st. Corrie: I will close the public hearing Stiles: I am sorry there were some people here that waited very patiently and finally gave me a letter and asked that it be read into the record. • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 89 Corrie: Alright, I will reopen the public hearing for item #19. Stiles: I will see if I can read this, it is from Ken and Susan Kelly at 604 Pennwood Meridian. As long time residents of Pennwood Street we are opposed to the development of the Ballantyne project which adjoins the street we live on. We are compassionate to the needs of the developer but we are questioning if the City has looked into purchasing the land for a much needed park. Our feel is that mr. Ballantyne will make a profit on this project and our property which adjoins his will suffer the cost of economic distraction for resale. When we moved into our home on Pennwood eight years ago we thought we would have neighbors building homes similar to ours. We do not feel that connecting commercial and residential would benefit the current existing homeowners of Pennwood Street. ACHD states approximately 2000 vehicle trips will take place in front of our home after the development is complete. We feel this is a definite economic disadvantage to our homes resale value. We also feel that we should not be the victims to more unwanted commercial development in Meridian. If the Council approves the development we as homeowners feel we wilt suffer the following, economic burden on our home equity; two unsafe surroundings for our children. We ask the Council not to open Pennwood into commercial from residential and that the developer compensate the affected homeowners." I will give this to Will. Corrie: Okay, we will enter that into the record. Anybody else from the public that would like to enter testimony at this time. Forrey: Just so the Council knows, originally we did have Pennwood connecting between Jim Ballantyne's property and into the subdivision where there is a stub street. That was at the request of the Highway District. As we have met with neighbors and the Hoff Company Norm Fuller and all of the neighbors around there finally settled on an approved traffic plan and Pennwood will not be connecting the neighbors were able to change the Highway District's thinking on that. On this new plat you will see it doesn't go through so I think that solves Mrs. Kelly's comments. She was very good about meeting with the highway District and we have talked to her about that. Corrie: Anybody else from the public that would like to give testimony? Hearing none I will close the hearing and Mr. Morrow (inaudible) Morrow: (inaudible) Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that the public hearing be continued to May 21st for item 19 and 20, any discussion? Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 9b Rountree: Just a comment for Shari will you let those folks know that is what was testified to about (inaudible) Corrie: Any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #21: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SPORTSMAN POINTE NO. 5: Corrie: Counsel, do we have that development agreement, I think we just got it. Counselor? Crookston: I am sorry I have not reviewed that yet. Corrie: I will entertain a motion to table. Bentley: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Rountree, all those in favor say dye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #22: NON-DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR GOLFVIEW ESTATES NO. 4 AND 5: Bentley: Motion to table. Morrow: He hasn't reviewed those either. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Rountree to table to May 21st, any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #23: REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON ANGEL PARK DEVELOPMENT: • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 91 Corrie: You have a letter in front of you that requests a one year extension be granted for filing of final plat. Anybody wish to have the applicant speak or do you want to take the word of the letter from Hubble Engineering? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move we grant the request for one year time extension for Angel Park Development. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that we extend the one year time extension on Angel Park Development from this date, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Smith: Mr. Mayor, could we back up to or could I have you back up to Golfview Estates Non-Development agreement. The developer is in a I guess you could call it a chicken and egg situation. They want to record the subdivisions both 4 and 5, but they don't want to be required to bond for the improvements that would be required in order to obtain our signature. That is the City Clerk and the City Engineer signatures. Which would allow them to carry the plat onto the County Engineer. So that is the reason they have submitted this non-development agreement and I think that the plat, Shari just informed me that the plat has to be recorded by June 20th because they are I think the 2nd, (inaudible) because it was over, I don't know if you recall but it ran over one year and they came to the Council and got a variance for the two year extension which gave them another year on the final plat approval and required that they record the plat by June 20th of this year. I believe that, I don't know the conditions of that variance I can imagine that it was kind of a drop dead deal, if it is not done by then you start over. I am just theorizing that is what the Council said because it was the second extension. This non-development agreement is basically for the entire subdivision no. 4 and 5. I had forwarded copies of a previous non- development agreement that we had used to the applicant's representative who is sitting here this evening, he is still here. I have not checked this against what I gave him but the language in it should be very similar to what we have used before with the exception of the legal description of this subdivision. Corrie: Gary this says Golfview No. 4 I don't see anything about No. 5 you say this is for both 4 and 5? Smith: There should be two of them, there should be a no. 4 and 5 separate. Corrie: You are right thank you. Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 92 • Smith: The only difference between the two I believe is the description of the property. Since the subdivision is not a plat there are not lots of records so the land is described by meets and bounds. The boundary of the property. I think it is also referred to as lots and blocks in what would be a recorded subdivision. I hope all of that makes some sense and I, there is a degree of urgency because of the length of time that is still going to be required by the developers that the developer is going to have to have to get the County Engineer's signature. I don't know what time period that is now. Shari said today it takes 2 weeks to get the County Engineer's signature. So, I don't know what your desires might be if you want to revisit this. If you want to approve this non-development agreement subject to Wayne looking at it rather than tabling it for two weeks to your next Council meeting, if that is something you want to do or not. But, that would put it at May 21st the meeting it would go to. I guess I defer to the applicant as to whether that is a doable thing from his standpoint to get the plat recorded, if it was all approved at that time. Corrie: Do you have any problem with that, we can always pull the motion and the second from that tabling and then you can redo the motions. Morrow: So what is the answer, can it be done the 21st or is it better to be done now. (Inaudible) Corrie: Motion was made by I think Mr. Bentley made the motion and Mr. Rountree seconded. Bentley: I withdraw the motion. Rountree: I withdraw second Corrie: I will entertain a motion for the non-development agreement for Golfview Estates NO. 4 and 5 subject to review of staff and their approval to be signed by the Mayor and attested by the Clerk. Bentley: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Rountree, all those in favor of the motion? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 93 ITEM #24: REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON FIELDSTONE MEADOWS NO. 4: Corrie: The final plat was approved on 5-3-94 one extension was given, it needs approximately 3 more months to record the plat. The mylar is in hand awaiting signature. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I think their request is for a six month extension. Corrie: That is correct. Morrow: I move we grant a six month extension for the plat for Fieldstone Development. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that we the six month time extension be approved for Fieldstone Meadows Subdivision No. 4, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #25: BRIGHT BEGINNINGS LEARNING CENTER: REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY MODULAR TRAILER: Corrie: You have that request by letter from Georgia Elliott. What is the Council's pleasure? Morrow: I note on this request that don't establish a time. Historically temporary structures like that have been limited to a one year time frame. Has it been the six months the first time or a year with six month renewals? Crookston: Generally six months at a time. Morrow: I would move that we grant the request for the temporary modular trailer, I am sorry, scratch that. Stiles: I would like to make sure that we have some input from the Fire Department that even allows something like this to be done. I don't know that we have had- any response from them at all but I would think that there are some other restrictions that you can't just set up a mobile home and call it a day care. Morrow: Isn't this for the day care that has been recently completed on Watertower just before you get to the police academy. It is a separate free standing building? Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 94 Stiles: Yes Morrow: And what they are asking for is a modular classroom to be put on their property is that correct? Stiles: Yes, but depending on the occupancy that is given, they may have sprinkler requirements, they may have, I just don't know. I would like to have some input from the Fire Department though before we tell them to go ahead and do it and then we get in trouble. Corrie: We don't know how many kids are going to be in it anyway. Morrow: Let me ask you this what kind of requirements do we have with the school district when they put up a modular? Stiles: Probably none, they probably don't ask. (Inaudible) Morrow: Well I tell you what let's do then, let's move to table until the 21st so you can generate that information. Stiles: Didn't you think that they would be here and maybe tell you where they would put it. Morrow: Not at twenty minutes to two. Stiles: Well if they are tabled then they will be up at the top of the next agenda. Rountree: Was that a motion? Morrow: Yes it was Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that this Bright Beginnings Learning Center request for a temporary trailer be tabled until May 21st until we get more information and also from the Fire Department, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? Morrow: Shari, you might notify them that they need to come or it would be to their benefit Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 95 to come. Stiles: (Inaudible) ITEM #26: GREGORY LIFT STATION CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH MARIAN CROSSLAND: Crookston: I can present that, the Gregory Lift station, the City has granted a contract to improve to redo that lift station. Mrs. Crossland had constructed a shed an the easement, she claimed that she had consent to do that from Earl Ward who was the previous superintendent. The City to redo the lift station needed some additional agreement from her the City got the property owner to the north to grant some additional use of some additional of his land. What she is doing is giving the City not giving but posting a $250 bond. John Shawcroft indicates that $250 if something should go wrong should take care of it. This is an agreement so that the City can go and use the property and that she posts the $250 bond. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Crookston: I am not sure Ron. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Crookston: It is on 7th I think. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Smith: It is West Washington and something (inaudible) Tolsma: (Inaudible) and she said Earl Ward gave her permission to build that shed? Smith: I don't know that he did. Tolsma: Earl Ward wasn't even working there when they bought that property (inaudible) Crookston: This lady I think has lived there for three years. Smith: When I first became aware that the building had been built over the easement it was being lived in by someone else. Crookston: That is correct Meridian City Council. May 7, 1996 Page 96 Smith: I think that it was done before Earl Ward was even here because that Gregory Lift station has been there for quite some time. Crookston: Fred Poser says that he was around when they built it. Smith: Well anyway, I think Wayne has outlined the conditions or the situation that exists. We just had to get additional property to the north on which the contractor could maneuver on rehabing the lift station. Since the Crossland property improvements cover part of our easement we asked them underwrite any repairs that would be necessary to the property to the north and they consented to the $250 bill and that is the agreement that Wayne has written and Crossland's attorney is Mark Freeman I believe and they have approved of it and Mrs. Crossland has signed this thing. So all we need is the City approval that we are okay with this and we can proceed. We have a contractor and he is ready to go to work next week. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we accept the Gregory Lift Station Agreement with Marian Crossland. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow second by Mr. Rountree that we accept the Gregory Lift Station Agreement with Marian Crossland, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest. Bentley; Second Corrie: Motion by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to have the Mayor sign and the attest by the City Clerk, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #27: WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: Corrie: This is to inform you in writing if you choose to you have the right to a predetermination hearing at 7:30 P.M. on 5-7-96, before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person to be judged on the facts and defend the claim made by the City that your Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 97 water/sewer/trash bill is delinquent, you may retain counsel. Your service will be discontinued on 5-15-96 unless payment is received in full. Is there anyone present that wishes to contest their water/sewer/trash delinquency? No response. They are hereby informed that they may appeal or have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to Idaho Code. Even though they appeal their water will be shut off. The amount of the turn off list is $16,980.69. Is there a motion for approval of the turn off list. Morrow: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that the water/sewer/trash delinquency turn off list be approved, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #28: APPROVE BILLS: Corrie: Entertain a motion to approve the bills? Bentley: So moved Morrow: Second Corrie: Motion by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Morrow, to approve the bills, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #29: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: Corrie: Mr. Smith? Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council members. We had a couple of bid opening results. The first one is the digester mixer procurement. We bought some new mixers for the digester and we had one bidder, that bid was opened at 3:00 p.m. on April 18th here at City Hall. Westech Engineering Company, Inc. was the bidder. The amount they had submitted was $67,971 was less than the estimate that we previously received. All of their bid was in conformance with the requirements. So my recommendation would be to award the bid to Westech Engineering Company, Inc. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 98 Morrow: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that Westech Engineering Company be awarded the bid of $67,971 for the digester mixer procurement, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Smith: The second item is bid results for an opening that we had here at City Hall on April 25th at 3:00 for the construction of clarifier/headworks improvements at the waste water treatment plant. They did schedule that you should have in your packet we had three bidders and Trammels Inc. is the low bid. Trammels has been doing work at the Waste Water Plant they constructed our ultra violet treatment facility and they just finished constructing our tertiary filter unit. They have done good work for the city. Their low bid of $737,821 was in conformance with all of the bid requirements. Everything checked out on it. The other two bidders, as you can see there is about a $1000 difference between them at $800,000 and Trammels was $43,000 less than our engineer's estimate. So I would recommend that we award the bid to Trammels Inc. Morrow: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that Trammels Inc, be awarded the bid for the clarifier/headworks improvements in the total amount of $737,821 any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council just one quick comment, I received a-call today from Jerry Nyman with ACRD. The joint meeting that was scheduled at the last joint meeting is set for May 17th here at City Hall. If you want to follow through with that schedule. If you do they would like some items for an agenda. Jerry commented on four items today and I will just read these to you. The improvement of Ten Mile Road from Ustick to Cherry Lane, which is one item that came up at the last meeting. The possibility of the City of Meridian seceding from the Ada County Highway District. I think that was discussed briefly. The comment of the amount of money that has been spent by ACHD in our Brea versus the amount of money that they have collected. And just a general discussion over lunch, everyone getting to know one another a little better. u Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 99 (Inaudible) • Rountree` One thing I would add Gary would be then discuss the criteria or the process they use to prioritize projects. It seems like they discussed heavily traffic counts at the last meeting. Morrow: The other thing is that they are now (inaudible) citizen advisory complaints over last year's budget they are not trying to devise a method to prioritize projects that (inaudible) direct result of what went on over the last 7 or 8 months. I don't know that in the case of Ten Mile that is a major issue with respect to it was used as an example of justification for sewer line expansion. Bentley: (Inaudible) Clair Bowman wants to meet with the entire City Council concerning and with Gary, concerning our needs out here and the possibility of building off ramps at Ten Mile especially with this amusement park situation. He is looking for a meeting with all of us in the very near future. Morrow: (Inaudible) part of our transportation (inaudible) Bentley: Well they want to boost it up. (Inaudible) Corrie: Any other items you want to discuss with them? (Inaudible) Smith: That would be fine, if you have something come up just give me a holler and I will get that to Jerry Nyman. Thank you. Corrie: Will Berg the City Clerk has a couple of items. One is the Meridian School Resource Officer Agreement, did you want to discuss that? Berg: I really didn't want to discuss it, name was the last one to put on the list so I have a couple of contracts that need to be approved and signed. Corrie: Do you want to quickly tell them what we have done on that and where we are with that agreement? Gordon: This is basically the same contract we have been using for about the last 8 or 9 years with the exception of I uped the fee another 5% and also this coming year they are going to pick up half of the overtime on their special events. Plus they have agreed to notify us at the beginning of the year which special events they want officer at and how Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 100 many officers they want there. This they have been doing in the past and therefore it has been tough to budget the money. So we provide three officers, one at the high school, one at the Meridian Academy and then one at the Middle School which handles the elementarys and that won't change it will still be the three officers. Corrie: Any questions for the chief? Gordon: It is a really good program, we hashed this over back and forth and they get definitely their money's worth out of it. 82% of our crime is juveniles and by having the officers in the schools we are clearing far move juvenile crimes then we are adult crimes because of that. Rountree: I have a couple comments, page 3, item (inaudible) suspect a student of having committed a crime the officer shall notify (inaudible) of the matter if in a fact an interview is conducted (inaudible) This is in the parental notification, we leave the parental notification all up to the school. I am wondering if our exposure is such that we would be criticized like they sometimes do (inaudible) and a kid goes home and says I had a sit down with the school resource officer today. And then they call the City. Gordon: Legally we don't have a time limit that we have to notify the parents the school does. That is kind of a CYA for the school that they are bound by (inaudible) our officers they want our officers to at least let them know so that they can notify the parents in a timely manner I think is how they have it and that is just a CYA for them. They wanted that in writing and I didn't have a problem with it. There is no problem with notifying the school (inaudible). Rountree: Okay, paragraph (inaudible) policies, procedures and rules (inaudible) violations of law the Meridian Police Department is not required to take law enforcement action and may leave the enforcement there of (inaudible). It goes on to state that these officers are supposed to report violations to the school but I don't think the City resource officer should be enforcing school policy. Gordon: We don't and that is what it is supposed to read that we don't enforce school policy. Rountree: It says with the "may'' we could construe that they could do that. If I read this and I was working under this it would appear to me that I have the option. Gordon: Very clearly they are told they don't have enforce policy. Crookstpn: I think that where that falls in is sometimes there is policy, violations of school • i Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 101 policy that are criminal violations. Rountree: Well that is taken care of in the sentence before, if you violate the law then Meridian police can enforce or will enforce. But this sentence speaks only to the school policy. Morrow: It says to the extent that the violations of those policies, procedures, rules and regulations does not constitute a violation of the law, the Meridian Police Department is not required to take law enforcement action and may leave the enforcement to the district. Rountree: That is unclear to me what they are supposed to do, I think they should, if it is a not a law related enforcement activity (End of Tape) Gordon: That is no big deal we can change that. This contract is all on computer. Rountree: I would suggest that you look at that. That is all I have. Corrie: (Inaudible) Morrow: I also noticed there is no place in here for signatures, is this not a signed contract thing? Gordon: Oh yes it is, there should be a signature page for everybody in the City of Meridian. (Inaudible) Morrow: I would move that we authorize the Mayor to sign, the Police Chief to sign, the City Clerk to attest the Meridian School Resource Officer Agreement. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that the City have the Mayor sign and Chief Gordon sign and Will Berg attest the School Resource Agreement, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Parking lot agreement, do you have that one? Crookston: That actually is not an option it is a right of first refusal. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 102 Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest the agreement granting the right of first refusal on Lot 7 and 8 of Block 2 of the Amended Plat of the Townsite of Meridian containing the dimensions of approximately 60 by 120 feet with Farmers and Merchants Bank. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, all those in favor of the motion? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: I have Executive Session down here I can hold off on one of those and I think Shari wanted to talk about this other one, well I guess Shari doesn't need to talk about i#. On the property that is out by the proposed purchase of Ten Mile out by the sewer plant. I guess I will leave it up to you. Stiles: Can I just get a letter from John Shawcroft and the appraisal he gave us, but I think it is a really good idea that you look at it and please get back to me. At the end of the week he would like to know if the City is interested. Morrow: Well we need to have a discussion on it if he wants and answer back by the end of the week. To tell you very candidly right now I am opposed to buying the property. I don't see any real reason to do that, I don't see that it benefits the City any. John Shawcroft's proposal indicated we could buy the property on time and in fact we cannot do that. I guess the question becomes or the proposal was put forth that it is a buffer zone well that if we use it for sludge disposal then what becomes the buffer zone. So, I think the price was too pricey. The owner of the property is certainly entitled to a response from us whether we are interested in purchasing the property or not. Corrie: Any other comments? Rountree: I would need some additional information on how it may or may not fit with the existing proposed development of the sewer plant or if it even does. I read John's letter. Stiles: Larry Peterson is very agreeable to any suggestions you might have, he is interested in keeping it somewhat agricultural he is talking about having some riding stables or something that would allow him to still use part of the property. You are saying we can't do a long term five years as part of the capital improvement program we couldn't do that. i Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 103 C~ Morrow: It is my understanding on that type of purchase we have to pay cash, you cannot indebt another Council and conceivably you have another Council in two years. Stiles: Oh there has to be a way to do that. Morrow: If there had been a way to do that Shari we would have bought the park ground on time. Stiles: Our problem is that we show this park area but unless we are going to come up with some money to buy the property he has got a developer ready to take it over now. I don't think that is in anybody's best interest to do that. Morrow: Well the thing of it is, why isn't it in his best interest to sell to a developer? Stiles: He wants to live there still, he would like to see it used for agricultural use, he has a little hobby farm. He may even want to build another house on the property further in. Morrow: What does that have to with the developer, he has 35 or 36 acres is that correct? Stiles: I think so. Morrow: And all of it is south of Ten Mile correct or Five Mile Creek? (Inaudible) Morrow: At $20,000 an acre where is the benefit to the City? How do we benefit with this parcel as opposed to something that is directly adjacent to the sewer plant and to the west of the sewer plant? Stiles: Has that been made available to the City? Morrow: We haven't asked yet, we haven't needed it. Obviously at some point if we are going to do a rapid sand infiltration basis and that type of stuff we need more property. Stiles: It would be nice for a future park site as far as the creeks and Nine Mile Creek and Five Mile Creek running through there. Morrow: Weli I have to tell you the odor at some times would preclude me from eating at the park site. I really don't see what this particular parcel of value to the City. Stiles: One great value to the City it has is it can be annexed and we can annex that Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 104 treatment plant as soon as possible so we don't have to go through Ada County Highway District. Morrow: I understand that but $720,000 to annex a piece of property. Stiles: Well it is not like you are not going to get any value from that. He has an appraisal on it, the City would be welcome to do a second appraisal if they didn't feel, that was appropriate. Morrow: Well I don't' think it is appropriate I think that right now development dirt in this area is a fine demand deal it can be as low as 15,000 it can be as high as 20,000, 21,000 or 22,000. But I think if there was a lot of activity you wouldn't see development agreements, I am sorry you wouldn't see none development agreements being brought forth. Smith: Mr. Mayor and Councilman, I think one of the things that we are concerned about is the issue of residential development building up against the plat boundaries. I think we talked a little bit about this before. I was made aware of a situation in Boise at the Lander Street treatment plant where they have residential built right up against the plant boundaries. Down there the have just a tremendous problem combatting odors and their odor complaints that they receive from the adjacent property owners. As they explained to me in a situation where once they disconnect a pipe they have a charcoal filter that has a suction on it that is utilized immediately just because of the odor that comes out in a pipe repair that they might have. They have spent a lot of money on odor control and just maintaining public relations with the property owners. I think that is one thing that is fueled this research in purchasing this property is that we are in need of property where we can supply sludge at this point of time depending on what we do with our sludge. Even though like Walt said this is, if we did that we have some property kitty corner that is being built on, we have some right across from Usticlc that will be built on is Englewood and we have so me more across Ten Mile that will be built on is Hartford Subdivision. So again, this is probably plant sludge there is probably a short term deal. With development coming out to that area as it is. Morrow: I think the argument for that is not real strong here from the standpoint you are talking 50 feet away. What is the next 50 feet (inaudible) at that point Ten Mile Road is 50 feet wide and as you say Hartford is there so odor stops at that 50 feet. Smith: No, I am saying that is not a good argument as far as land application goes at least that corner of it. Morrow: These Peterson parcel has substantial footage on Ustick and so the issue is that • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 105 50 feet doesn't count either in certain terms of odors. I guess what I am suggesting to you is if we are going to get hit with charcoal filters because we are already there and the buyer that buys recognizes that we are there he is somewhat entitled to whatever it is he gets. And buying the parcel of this ground if push comes to shove is not going to take the requirement that we have to buy charcoal filters away from us. Smith: I understand what you are saying Walt, but I think that, I don't know how long Lander has been there but I think the Lander plant has been there a long time. Morrow: I can tell you it has been there when I was in grade school, that is a long time. (Inaudible) Smith: I made a point when Candlelight Subdivision came in and Hartford of telling the dirvelopers and bring it to your attention the CounciPs attention at that time that treatment plant is there, it is a 1/4 mile from that intersection and it has been there since 1979 operating. And that those people need to be aware that it is there. Time goes by and they forget what they have been told and they sell their house and the next guy that buys the house doesn't know the plant is out there and then there is a little wind out of the northwest, the digester burps and people are throwing up their lunch. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Smith: I don't know Corrie: Well I guess we can think about it, it should have some further thoughts. Smith: I understood he was looking for work too, is that right? Stiles: He was working at BFI I guess he worked there for about 16 years and suddenly lost his job. He has been very upfront about that, he was a little panicked at first and was wanting an immediate answer and he settled down a little bit since then. He is totally reasonable, he would love for any of you to come out and look at the property. He is wanting to try and preserve it but he is looking out for himself too and what he has to do for his family. He is willing, he is real flexible it could be 5 acres it could be 20 acres. He has no need to off load the whale thing. I just think it is a good thing because somebody goes to develop that we are not going to be able to say you need to put this 100 foot- buffer in here because this treatment plant stinks and we don't want you abutting up right next to it. Morrow: A buffer is not going to solve that problem. It would be ridiculous to require a 100 Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 106 foot buffer because you are not going to buffer odors. That is a risk that they take if they choose to develop it. Stiles: Can't trees and some plantings help that? Morrow: Shari, when the wind blows and it blows sewer odor you can smell it a mile away from there. The other issue that I think is really important here is we are talking about money that has to come from enterprise funds and based on our current usage and our current expansion of our sewer plant is is going to be a real (inaudible) to try and stay within what we have got for funds to get to the expansion stuff that we have got to do over the next 4 or 5 years. I don't see any money available to do this deal in the short term. Stiles: I thought John indicated that they had some in his yearly budget, didn't they have about $75,000 a year, what is that for? Smith: Well it seemed like, I don't know if it was this last year or the year before last we had some money to purchase some property out in Kuna area (inaudible). Morrow: Yes we had $200,000 or so. Well I don't believe that we (inaudible) put that in this year's budget. Smith: I don't believe it did either because we had the plant upgrade that we had to do the $880,000. Morrow: And that is also what precipitated the idea or part of the idea in terms of going to composting those kinds of things was that we could get away from that and not have to own land. Not take it out of, if we buy it then it is no longer tax producing, that is a philosophical question. But we felt we had better solutions to the problem then buying tracts of ground. Stiles: (Inaudible) Morrow: And then you still have the same odor deal but now you have it closer to the residents. Stiles: Well I don't see any other way we are going to get annexed out at the treatment plant. I have looked at every other, nobody else is willing to even talk. Morrow: Well if he sells it to a developer the developer has to be annexed. Stiles: At his leisure, if he wants to wait and hang on to it for five years I don't think Gary • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 107 is wanting to go through Ada County Commissioners any time they want to do any expansion out there. Morrow: Well now that we have a full time City Attorney we can do a shoestring annexation and make him earn his bucks. Corrie: Well at this late hour let's think about that. Let's run through this real quick then, Gary do you have anything else? Shari? Crookston: I got a call today this afternoon from Mark Freeman who represents the school district. We have dealt with Mr. Goldsmith on some property, Gary Voigt also owns some property out there. Johnson, Greg Johnson, owns some land out there and the other party we didn't know who owned it. The ,idea was to have a school park site out there. The school apparently has reached an agreement to buy 55 acres from Gary Voigt on that is on Overland but it is north of the Ridenbaugh Canal. The property that I believe was Sundance and Mr. Voigt was willing to abide by his agreement to have that go to the school and the City for some use I don't know whether or not there is actually going to be site for 12 acres but Mr. Freeman told me that they were still planning on that. That they would have it separated from the high school site in some means. They actually planned on moving the high school site somewhat east so that this area would still be open for an elementary site because they don't want mix them. They don't want to have access from one to the other. So they are talking about buying 59 acres or having 59 acres of which Gary Voigt is still willing to donate four of those acres. There would be a site for 55 acres for the high school. The question that Mark Freeman asked is who should get the site City or school, he felt that it should still go to the school, he has no problem with having an agreement entered into that if it does not go into a school site that it would then be deeded to the City. His question really is do we want an agreement to that effect or do we just want a letter or just an understanding. I felt that it was appropriate to have an agreement to that effect with the School District that when they get that four acre parcel from Voigt if the School does not use it for an elementary school that it does go to the City which was the deal with Voigt as it started. Morrow: That is not right Wayne, the deal was and has always been is on the school park sites and the conditions of those things that we did as a Council was the deeds came to the City. It didn't ever go to the school. Marty Goldsmith circumvented the process, cut down the amount of dirt that he contributed and the school district was naive enough to accept the dirt and then realize that they had done it out of sequence. It never ever was intended to go to the school district. The motions were made that the dirt comes to the City and then the City controls that and if we wanted to develop a park ahead of a school we are not going to be held hostage by the school district. And so how does this get convoluted to this scenario that you are talking about now? • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 108 Crookston: Because we are talking about four acres that Voigt has basically agreed to what you were talking. Morrow: The deed was to come to us. Crookston: Well whatever I am not going to argue that because I would agree with you, I don't want to argue against something that I -agree with. The point now is that the land is going to be purchased by the school and all the school wants to know is whether or not we want an agreement with the school so that the land, what Freeman said was if it is not used far a school site in some capacity whether it is 10 acres for elementary school and two is left over for a park or whatever they just want to have an agreement that if that is not used in some capacity for a school purposes then the City does have it. Morrow: Wait a minute, are you telling me that the school is buying the four acres (inaudible) Crookston: No, Voigt is donating it, the school is buying 55 acres but they are actually dealing, the school is paying for 55 acres, 4 acres is going to be donated by Voigt. (Inaudible) Crookston: I do know how much they are paying for it, they are paying $1,475,000 for 55 acres. (Inaudible) Corrie: If they want to give it to the school there is nothing we can do about it. Morrow: But Bob that was the requirement of his approval of his annexation and zoning was the 4 acres be donated to the City. Corrie: I don't think he has annexed and zoned it has he? Crookston: Sundance is annexed and zoned. Corrie: Well I see what you are saying okay. Morrow: The same condition applied to Goldsmith and Goldsmith circumvented it and we didn't find out until after he had already donated the 2.5 acres to the school and he cut it way down. And remember he had in that agreement the clause that allowed him to recapture the 2.5 acres after a 7 year period bf time if the school did develop it. We got, we were fortunate enough to get that changed. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 10g Corrie: It is my understanding that this school program, the buying program of the school -could go down the tubes if we don't approve of that? Crookston: I am not aware of that. Morrow: What would the difference be, they would just .deed the property, Gary Voigt would deed the property to us because that is who the agreement is with in terms of the property, it is not with the school district. Crookston: I agree with you Walt, the question that Freeman asked me was who should get the site. So we tell them that this four acre site should go to the City but we have an agreement because they are getting the deed from Voigt. Morrow: For the 55 acres? Crookston: Well right now as I understand it they have an agreement for the 59 acres, I think we should say that is fine as long as you immediately after you receive the deed you deed it to the City. I am not sure they will go along with that but I think that is the City's position. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Crookston: I think we need at least an agreement as to what is gong to happen. That the City ends up with the four acres either now or in the future. Preferably now. Morrow: Well that would be the terms of the agreement (inaudible). Corrie: That would give us 6.5 acres right there, that corner. Morrow: (Inaudible) school district has 2.5 acres. Crookston: Goldsmith deeded his to the school district (inaudible). So the City's position then is the four acres is deeded to the City? Morrow: That was the agreement to begin with. Corrie: What we do later is deed it back to the school? Morrow: Well if at some point if they want to put a school there but remember the hope there was that (inaudible) bringing together the dirt. And the reason for us to get was to A insure (inaudible) and B that we had the option of developing the park first. Mei-idian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 110 Corrie: I guess Council what is your pleasure? Rountree: I think the decision has been made from what I here, conditions of annexation require that four acres be donated to the City (inaudible) Crookston: What (inaudible) four acres deeded to the City now because that was the basis of Voigt's annexation. Rountree: My question is why hasn't that been done a long time ago? (Discussion Inaudible) Corrie: I think he was just a little bit uptight because he had to give it and nobody else did too, between you and me. He felt he could give it to the school his conscience is better (inaudible). Is that all you have? Mr. Morrow? Morrow: Two or three items, one is that we were going to send a letter to Idaho Truss thanking them for their help (inaudible) signed by all five of us, has that happened. Golf Contracts, with Rock, Hi-Micro Tool Corporation, Gilliam Construction, Ewing Company, the $10,000 donations and the life time passes. That is all done and ready to be signed by each of the four of them and by the City. It is in its final format but we will need td move forward with that authorization to sign. Any questions? Corrie: That was our attorney that made that up correct? Morrow: Yes (inaudible) So is there a motion to authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest? Rountree: So moved Morrow: Second Corrie: Motion made and seconded that the Mayor sign and the City Clerk attest to the four Rock Contractors Inc., Hi-Micro Tool Corporation, Gilliam Construction Inc. and the Ewing Company for corporate membership. Morrow: You have the originals of that Will? (Inaudible) Corrie: Any discussion or comment? All those if favor? Opposed? Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 111 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow: The next question is what is the status of the Meridian Greens water pump station 30 days or so ago we as a Council took the position that they either maintained the landscaping or it became desert scene. Corrie: I talked to Bob Geisler on that he hasn't gotten back with the Homeowners Association I think they meet the 15th. Morrow: The next question is with respect to the and here we need to do some thinking with respect to the license bureau. We are getting awfully close to the time of their contract, we as a Council need to decide what our program is going to be for that space and start giving those people fair warning if we are going to be wanting that space they are going to need to move someplace else. So I think we need to be talking about that because if I remember right it is the month of May when that Corrie: The 20th of May is when they want to have a budget. I am supposed to meet with Bob McQuade and all of those down there on the 13th. Morrow: There are several questions, part of what we have got to do as a Council and I think what I would like to see our emphasis this budget year is in the area of getting our staff the help that they desperately need and very candidly we have to have some place to put those people that we bring on board. It is not reasonable to expect particularly our department heads as Gary and Shari (inaudible) 80 hours weeks with no end in site. So I think Tolsma: (Inaudible) Corrie: Just for Council's note I did send a letter to the Meridian Library that if they wanted to sell that property that we would like to have the first right of refusal (inaudible) if it is a possibility of buying that over there I don't know I just thought I would put our name in to possibly pick that up. I understand from the (inaudible) first right of refusal to that anyway but I just (inaudible) to make sure we got our name in there. Morrow: And the question there would be do we buy something or do we build on here. I don't know that I am in favor of buying something to house the license bureau. Corrie: (Inaudible) Morrow: On this particular building I don't, but we can go to the side. • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 112 Come: Well that is absolutely right. Morrow: I think the other thing that we can look at as part of the transition is that we can suggest to them that the employees become county employees and not be city employees. Corrie: I had a conversation with Patty on that and I think the Sheriff would like to do it that way but the County realized that they have such a damn good deal over here that they want, they say they would be happy to let their employees get the same pay scale as the ones down town. I said no we can't do that because we have too much of a diversity between theirs and ours and they are still our employees. So we are still banging that around, so that may come up Walt I don't know. Bentley: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: Well and the other thing is that we are going to, we should be closer to adopting our job descriptions and salary requirements and if these people, I understand what your point is about jealousies about who makes what money but if you adopt a job description and salary range to go with it and everybody has a .right to pursue those vacancies when they become vacant and that is the reason for having job descriptions and salary ranges. And that will put an end to the who get's what and that kind of bickering. And maybe in the short term because I think this problem is going to resolve itself i the short term they become County employees anyway. That solves that part of it. The next thing I had a question about is in I have taken it off the (inaudible) we need to develop some method for reconsideration of things like findings of fact and so on and so forth because David Turnbull gave to us a document on Ashford Greens whereby within the body of that findings of fact and conclusions there are certain things that were done that made the project simply undoable. So now what happens is that he doesn't get the opportunity to come forward to Council for 30 more days some time in June to address his concerns about those findings of fact and conclusions. So it seems to me that we should have some procedure by which if we adopt a document and there is some sort of error in there or there is something in there that wasn't talked about that we can reconsider it at the first opportunity without having to go through publishing and all those other kinds of things. So I guess my question would be is how do we get to that point? Corrie: I guess that all depends on if you have a public hearing. If you have a public hearing you have to give notice in the papers. (Inaudible) Morrow: I understand that, I guess what I am asking of Wayne is is there a methodology for reconsideration and then the other thing is concerning that is it seems to me this recent • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 113 court decision would change a whole lot of what has been thought to be the accepted practice, the one that Mr. Neville did with the City of Eagle and the Brighton Corporation concerning the ground, Hobble Creek ground. Corrie: Would that have anything to do with this one particular case or does that have an override of all of them, his decision? Crookston: I have heard about the case but I have not seen the decision so I don't know how it applies. As far as Walt's question we need to adopt a reconsideration procedure that we would just have to put into the zoning ordinance and the subdivision and development ordinance. (Inaudible) Crookston: We have an appeal procedure yes but we don't have a reconsideration procedure. (Inaudible) Morrow: Well we can reconsider something that we have done without an explanation (inaudible). Crookston: Just as Mr. Turnbull's indication is it is not something that the City did or did not do it is something that he as I understand it he had a plat or a document that showed if you will outlines of where homes could be built in essence a building site, the home could be anywhere in that building site and he is talking about zero lot lines but there were no zero lot lines shown on that document. I don't recall that they .referenced zero lot lines in their presentation. Shari and I talked about that already. Stiles: What they presented didn't even make sense, they were talking about they would have a five foot sideyard and a huge easement with an additional ten feet of the next lot. I don't think anybody ever understood what that was (inaudible). When. you have a 46 foot wide lot and the plans they present (inaudible) ten feet left of somebody else's lot. So I don't know what they were doing. Morrow: Well we will find out when we rehear it in the June meeting. The last item is in our box last week was a note conceming a recreation center citizens committee. I want to spend some time probably not tonight but in the very near term discussing that whole concept, that committee concept and some of the members on that committee and the scope of that in the context it has never been presented to the Council as a committee or as a whole. So I think that we need to spend some time discussing that and see what • • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 114 direction we as a Council go with that. Corrie: I won't argue that point with you tonight. I would be happy to then. Anything else? Morrow: No that is it. Corrie: Mr. Bentley? Bentley: I have a question, (inaudible) I have met with this advisory committee and they are looking into going over to Nampa (inaudible) one of the questions that somebody asked is they want to know what the exact policy or feeling of the City is on park sites under five acres. (Inaudible) Morrow: Well I think that the process that we have been working with is that stuff that is 1, 2, 3 acres that type of thing basically belongs as open spaces within subdivisions it is not something that the City wants to be really involved with because it is not cost effective to .deal with. And t think when we were doing the impact fee committee stuff we looked at five acres being the bottom sized park that we want to deal with. The only thing that I can really tell you is that it has always been five acres and up and the less the smaller stuff belongs within the subdivisions as green areas. Bentley: Well they asked me and I said I wouldn't give them a direct answer until I asked here because I wasn't exactly sure what the total feeling was on this. Rountree: And I think that was the direction that the development (inaudible) as neighborhood and (inaudible) Bentley: I understand the reasoning for it but I said I wanted to find out exactly before, I don't like making a statement and not knowing what I am talking about. That is all I have. Corrie: Mr. Rountree? Rountree: t have nothing. Corrie: Okay, I have got a couple of things, the Fire Department, on the Idaho Department of Lands requested that they again this year if we can furnish if they call on fires the engine 306 for standby at $1900 a day. They didn't use it last year but they don't know what kind of feel they have, we have been doing it the last few gears that they supply 3 men and a truck (End of Tape) Rountree: The request is just for the vehicle? • Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 115 Corrie: The vehicle and three firemen either the volunteers. • Morrow: Is that a joint request between us and the rural, so we both have to sign it? Corrie: Yes, I will entertain a motion for me to sign it from 6-1-96 to 6-1-97. Morrow: So move, I would move that we authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest the agreement with the Idaho Department of Land for a firs engine and three people. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have 306 and three firemen for operation at $1900 dollars a say, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: The Fair Board is having their centennial 1997 they are doing their regional events they want to know if somebody could come the 15th of this month at 3:00 they asked if I could, I can't, does anyone here want to go in my place? The Fair Board is going to have their centennial in 1997 and they are going to plan regional events at the fair office on the 15th of this month at 3:00. They asked if I would attend the executive session on that and I said I could, I have other meetings. If anybody else that wants to do it, if they .don't maybe I will find somebody that could represent the Mayor's office. On the 17th of May at approximately 4:00 that is the same time we have the ACRD luncheon they want to have a ground breaking for the nursing home on Pine Street, Chamber of Commerce. Anybody that would like to be there we would like to have them. You think about that is you are still around after that meeting. Morrow: I think the guys that are closest candidates ought to go, Bob and Ron. (Inaudible) Corrie: We talked about the IRS where we have, help me on this one Troxell and, Holly Troxell (inaudible) is the tax consultant there he is the one working with Eagle. I can check with him and he said that he would be happy to work with us and Eagle at the same time to cut the expenses down. He is a tax expert, he used to be with the IRS as a matter of fact. If you want to have him do that we maybe can have him write up the six points of protest for us too. But we need to really get hopping on this one. Rountree: What are we looking at cost wise? Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 116 Corrie: He will give it to us (inaudible) we are looking at $135,000 penalties right now so it won't be that much. I will entertain a motion that we work with him and Eagle and the City of Meridian at the same time for the tax consultant and fight this thing with the IRS right now. I will keep you informed as far as costs are concerned. He hasn't given me that information yet but I will get it to you as soon as I can. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we authorize Holly Troxell (inaudible) to represent us in the tax matters: Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: One other thing the draft of findings of fact and conclusions of law do you want to give those out. Morrow: We were going to discuss that on the 21 st I thought? Corrie: I was (inaudible) by the press again. (Inaudible) Morrow: (Inaudible) the answer may very well be that we do have to have Wayne explore that decision and see what (inaudible) might impact some of that. Corrie: Well we are going to do it the 21st then? Morrow: Yes Corrie: Okay that is all I have. Will? Entertain a motion to adjourn? Morrow: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: 3 Yea, 1 Nay Meridian City Council May 7, 1996 Page 117 MEETING ADJOURNED AT 2:55 A.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: R ROBERT D. CORRIE ATTEST: LLIAM G. BERG, JR., CI ERK MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL • AGENDA TUESDAY, MAY 7, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 1996: ~Jp~~v'~ SWEAR IN TWO NEW POLICE OFFICERS: DAVID HOFMANN & RICHARD SHADDUCK -" 1. MICHAEL CASSEN: PRESENTATION OF CITY SEAL: 7 uL~ lr~~ i~2.~ 2l f% / ~q~ ~~'~ 2. TABLED APRIL 2, 1996: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUED VISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: ¢~6~- C~-~fy,,«cd L'~~~-~ c7^~,y 1~~ /n~- 3. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE LAKE AT CHERRY LANE NO. 5 BY STEINER DEVELOPMENT: DISCUSSION OF REQUIREMENTS IN FINDINGS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: ~a,~fe u~~ ~~ ~~ ~~t~.. as ,off ~,e~.ue~~ . 4. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY DAVE LEADER: ~~wrove ~'u~ct try r~C'%e~o~" m~ .. /~7~ferJ'v~Ce~~e~~"'~rom ~cl~ ih~a-(v ~Cu.~~h~r~,tJ'u~~r~d~rr-~afia~-~~'>~~i f77~hy 5. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY ANGELA MILLER: a~pi ~~~.. ~~~,~~/L G~~ri~d. G~-d. Candi ~ ~-~ u,¢e ~7.~Prt~c~ 6. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: ROD CULLIP: REQUEST FOR SEWER HOOK-UP: G~Fin,c-e,a..~ ~-~ C~~'s 2r~~-en.s~ 7. TABLED APRIL 16, 1996: AVEST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: AVEST PLAZA LANDSCAPING: QPPih~v:~ la~ndfcap~~Jo o ~ ~vt 7 w~-~ ~Jfracfb~ o~ C'~rQV~on,~ -fe~~ez.a.,-oJ /am~c~cPr e~ /ot ~ wig ~vdrd~h~, heF~ ~e d~~i~~ 8. FINAL PLAT: FIELDSTONE MEADOWS N0.5 SUBDNISION BY GARY VOIGT: 9. FINAL PLAT: HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION N0.5 BY INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT: r,~p~nror~.e 10. FINAL PLAT: BEDFORD PLACE SUBDIVISION N0.2 BY BRIGHTON CORP.: Prop-~ 11. PUBLIC FARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A LEARNING C T R FOR 50 STUDENTS BY MILLSTREAM PROP.: a~~rov~ ~ . ~~e~L ~cPpr~v~e ~u i' 12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GROUP DAY CARE BY CRYSTAL MARTINEZ: ~~p~rQ~? arK eK-d~e~ ,d/~'~ ~lC G~po~~~ pup 13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A TRANSFER OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FRO M KIDZ CONNECTION TO CHILDREN'S UNIQUE STYLE: ~~p~ITdv~Y ~amJ~e% 14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR RAILSIDE ~ f,~r~ve w ~i iC. ern aCi~• ~s SUBDIVISI~ BY RON YANKS: 15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE PRESSURIZED IRRIGATION REQUIREMENT FOR RAILSIDE SUBDIVISION BY RON YANKS: U' ~~ a,~~`~.ey E~~-hep~. ~l~ Inc°lL 16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PORKY PARK NO. 1 SUBDIVISION BY RON-VAN AUKER: L'~f~h~- ~/~ 17. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 14 ACRES TO I-L FOR OLSON-BUSH NO.2 SUBDIVISION BY R-2 DEVELOPMENT ~Pn ro ~ e a ~n-~-~ d ~'~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ j v v-e, ~Le ccJr ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ftvvn:e f~ jo~.e~o u~-e {~r-~ ~ ceJ 18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR. A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR OLSON- BUSH NO.2 SUBDMSION BY R-2 DEVELOPMENT: u.~pr'v~~ 19. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FORA PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BALLANTYNE TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK BY JIM BALLANTYNE: 20. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR BALLANTYNE-TROUTNER BUSINESS PARK BY JIM BALLANTYNE; TABLED MARCH 5, 1996) 21. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SPORTSMAN POINTS NO. 5: ~~/~ use !~? a 2! f~ 22. NON-DEVELOPMENT ~-GREEMENT FOR GOLFVIEW ESTATES N0. 4 & 5: ~~,pr~v~ 23. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON ANGEL PARK DEVELOPMENT: G~~~lj"b v~ Q"YC.C~ ~,G ~fi~. ~ ~r ~ 24. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON FIELDSTONE MEADOWS N0.4: 25. BRIGHT BEGINNINGS LEARNING CENTER: REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY MODULAR TRAILER: ~~/~P Lc~a~ ~22.a~ Zl f7 26. GREGORY LIFT STATION CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH MARIAN CROSSLAND: ac~ept- 27. WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: ~ro~-e. 28. APPROVE BILLS: a-~~an~vt, 29. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER: 1. BID RESULTS: DIGESTER MIXER PROCUREMENT: 2. BID RESULTS: CLARIFIER/HEADWORKS IMPROVSMENT PROJECT: B. WILL BERG, CITY CLERK: 1. MERIDIAN SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER AGREEMENT: 2. PARKING LOT WITH FARMERS & MERCHANTS: 30. EXECUTIVE SESSION: CITY OF MERIDIAI~ PU` ~~C MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET ~M ~ 19g( x:30 P/r1 ~ CITY OF MERIDIA PUBLIC~.~tEETING SIGN-U SHEET ,1~1i.~,. 7 . 19 9G - ~:3c ~ m MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: MAY 7.1996 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 27 REQUEST: WATERISEINERITRASH DELINQUENCIES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: ~~ ~^, ~' CITY BUILDING DEPT: ~~ MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: P~II Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. • ~ DELINQUENCY FOR MAY TURNOFF SCHEDULED FOR 05/15/96 Corrie: This is to inform you in writing, if you choose to, you have the right to a pre-determination hearing at 7:30 P.M. , 05/07/96, before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person to be judged on the facts and defend the claim made by the City that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel. This service will be discontinued on 05/15/96, unless payment is received in full. Is there anyone present who wishes to contest their water,- sewer and trash delinquency? No response. Come: They are hereby informed that they may appeal or have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court, pursuant to Idaho Code. Even though they appeal, their water will be shut oi£ The amount of the turn off list is 16, 89 0.06. • DELINQUENCY LIST TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULED FOR 05/15/96 ACCOUNT # NAME & ADDRESS AMT. PAST DUE 1---720 DOUGLAS HADLEY 44.00 647 W. BROADWAY AVE 1---800 SID & S. BREWER 192.02 423 W.BROADWAY AVE 1---920 JON C. HOFFMAN 67.10 233 W. BROADWAY AVE 1--1160 DONALD J. PLATEN 44.00 32 W. IDAHO AVE 1--3310 EMIL & E. BRINCKEN 110.40 711 W. PINE AVE 1--3510 EARL & K. BRINEGAR 192.10 205 W. PINE AVE 1--4100 HAROLD BRISCOE 30.00 646 W.FRANKLIN RD. 2----70 CYNTHIA THOMAS 44.00 922 W. 2ND ST 2---110 DAVID SANTISTEVAN 54.40 230 W. PINE AVE 2---390 DANIEL LUKE 77.00 712 W. PINE AVE 2--1250 ELIZABETH WEAKLEY 53.80 1 X28 W. 1ST ST 2--1270 MOLLIE P. FLERCHINGER 63.80 1546 W. 1ST ST 2--1560 DAVID DOMKA 53..90 1404 W. 2ND ST 2--1610 DENICE DESIL,ET 85.50 1502 W. 2ND ST 2--1690 E. RALPH NASH 87.00 1616 W. 2ND ST 2--1890 TERESA DEWITT 39.10 324 W. MAPLE AVE 2--1960 DONALD M. DICKSON 77.00 233 W. MAPLE AVE 2--1970 KERRY L. CARSON 380.30 225 W. MAPLE AVE 2--2030 VIRGINIA MEYER 48.60 230 CAMELLIA AVE 2--2140 WII.MA BLAIR 86.90 1239 W. 2ND ST 2--2180 DUWAIN SHEPARD 83.60 238 CHERRY AVE 2--2350 DIANA HARPER 44.00 126 W. WASHINGTON AVE 2--2490 MANUAL BARROSO 70.40 330 CHERRY AVE 2--2550 PAUL PACK 85.50 1313 W. 4TH ST 2--3712 CLYDE BRINEGAR 106.70 1625 MERIDIAN ST 2--3742 DENNIS MONTGOMERY 50.60 1535 MERIDIAN ST. 2--3912 DONALD & C. COUCH 54.00 1121 MERIDIAN ST 2--3952 GARY & N. GRIFFIN 66.00 1023 MERIDIAN ST 2--4550 TOMMY VINCENT .79.80 1329 W. 13TH AVE 2--4760 RICHARD F. MADER 47.30 1422 W. 14TH ST 2--5610 K.HOPKINS/G.L.ARCHULETA 57.20 1504 W. WASHINGTON ST. 2--5650 KENNETH WEATHERS 53.90 1527 W, WASHINGTON ST. 2--5730 DAVID & B. WALKER 57.20 1339 W. CARLTON AVE 2--5790 LINDA SOULS 50.60 1104 W. 13TH AVE 2--5960 E. GAINES/R. SCHULER 87.10 1104 WASHINGTON PL 2--6030 TOM KRASOWSKI 70.50 1017 W. 12TH AVE 3----42 LUVIVIINDA SCHWEND 90.20 757 N.ABERNATHY WY 3----72 COREY BARYON BUII,DERS 44.00 670 N. TIDWELL WAY • 3----82 ANNETTE 51.20 2268 W. DAYTON DR. 3---308 MICHAEL BITTNER 60.50 2065 W. SNYDER DR 3---318 KIlVIERY DECKER 66.00 694 N.ABERNATHY WY 3---332 DAVID PORTER 67.10 1979 W: SLATON DR 4--2184 JOHN SNELDERS 37.70 1256 N. YAKIMA WY 4--2304 RUSSELL KOYLE 67.10 1515 N.SANTA ROSA PL 4--2308 CHARLES & T.BUTTERFIELD 228.80 1475 N. SANTA ROSA PL 5---264 TERRANCE & G. BRENNAN 93.50 1225 N. SAW CREEK PL 19---28 ROBERT GII,BERT 57.20 3864 HARBOR POINT DR 20-1486 CHARLES H[JFF 54.00 3552 W. TUPELO CT 20-1508 J. ERIC ZELLER 80.30 1885 N. OAK HII.LS DR 20-1638 THOMAS LINK 67.10 1920 INCLINE WY 20-1664 STEVEN MEDLEY 100.10 3761 WOODMONT DR 20-1692 STEVEN & C. NEEDS 111.60 3674 WOODMONT DR • 20-1758 STEPHEN & L. LYONS 63.12 3602 W. STANWICH DR 21--582 MARJORIE CHANCE 66.90 2606 W.PEBBLESTONE CT 21--996 DAVID & K. GOURLEY 92.70 2723 W. PEBBLESTONE CT 21-1068 JOHN HURRAY 47.30 2748 W: WHITESTONE CT 21-1174 DAVID TWADDLE 86.90 2492 W. CHATEAU DR 21-1480 BETTS LESTER 90.90 2663 W. CHATEAU DR 21-1754 KEVIN W. BINGHAM 80.30 1851 KRISTEN WAY 21-1758 ROBERT B. COOK 63.80 1840 TODD WAY 21-1760 LINDY L. GRAPATIN 73.72 1890 MARIANNA PL 21-1770 YVONNE DESIND 204.60 1941 MARIANNA PL 21-1772 JON D. MANIER 80.84 1911 MARIANNA PL 21-1820 MARK DAVIS 53.90 2001 TODD WAY 21-2018 WILLIAM STUHR 53.90 2876 W. GEMSTONE DR 21-2068 JEFFREY & P.PUGMIRE 67.10 3015 W. ANN ST • 21-2070 MICHAEL A: ANKENMAN 77.00 2993 W. ANN ST 21-2182 JUAN S. LUNA 83.60 3040 W. HIGAN ST 21-2260 SUSAN BREWSTER 103.40 1893 N. SWAINSON AVE 21-2732 RON THURBER 65.70 2482 N. STONE PL 21-2894 JAMIE MUNROE 53.90 2579 N.STONE PL 21-2940 LAWRENCE KOERNER 44.00 2963 W.FIELDSTREAM DR 21-2990 HUBERT & A. PRICE 281.40 3133 W. MIltAGE CT 21-2996 VALERIE MATTHEWS 96.80 3043 W. NIIRAGE CT 21-3070 KIMBERLY DECK 67.10 2921 W. JOUST ST 22--160 HOMES BY KIRK CONST. 44.00 1788 W.EMERALD FALLS DR 22--312 STEVEN M. CANTRELL 70.50 1750 W. CHATEAU DR 22__788 JOHN TODD DOWNING 43.00 2316 W. CHATEAU DR 22__868 RONALD POLLARD 116.60 2307 N. KUBIK PL. 22--944 CHARLES & L. LEASURE 48.40 2220 W.SANDALWOOD DR 22-1150 GARY HARItISON 44.00 2365 W. RAINWATER CT 22-1350 GAYLEN & S. COWGER 44.30 1956 W.MCGLINCHEY ST 22-1354 RODNEY WILLIAMS 87.00 1908 MONACO WAY 22-1356 MARVIN L. KERBS 112.92 1983 HENDRICKS CT 22-1384 PETER MICHNO 53.90 1947 W.SANDALWOOD DR 22-1386 MICHAEL SCHAEFFER 100.10 1933 W.SANDALWOOD DR 22-1418 ALDO & F. BACHINI 41.80 1745 W.MCGLINCHEY ST 22-1450 ROBERT & D. FRENCH 47.30 1643 W.MCGLINCHEY ST 22-1462 KELLY & L. BOLEN 53.90 1650 W.HENDRICKS ST 22-1504 RANDY L. SIlVIPSON 77.00 1764 SANDALWOOD DR 22-1634 EVA LOUISE REED 57.20 2291 N.LINDER RD. 31-=448 MERLE LARSEN 44.00 1393 STOREY ST. 31--758 PHILIP MARR 67.10 1509 TANA DR 31--796 LINDA COLLINS 44.00 2239 FAIRWOOD DR • • 31-1686 MARK H. WOLFE 182.60 2778 NW 12TH ST 31-2236 LINDA PARSONS 73.70 2635 NW 13TH ST 31-223 8 RENEE TUBBS 74.40 1310 DARRAH DR 31-2250 ANOTONIO GARCIA 111.60 1382 DARRAH DR. 31-2262 ROBERT NOLAN 47.30 1494 DARRAH DR 31-2992 PAUL E. PARKER 60.50 2239 NW 15TH ST 31-3016 HARRY DAMS 67.10 2217 NW 14TH ST 31-3022 GARY TIPTON 67.10 2240 NW 14TH ST 31-3050 DEBRA FRENCH 116.90 1065 W. CHATEAU DR 31-3060 DAVID BASTIAN 79.30 960 W. CHATEAU DR 31-3236 VICKIE HRUSKA 116.70 2267 NW 11TH ST 31-3364 ALLEN BURGESS 53.80 2282 NW 10TH AVE 31-3 3 92 ARTHUR & M. BOYLE 47.3 0 1074 DELMAR DR. 31-3420 JULIA COUCH 70.20 1012 FAIRWOOD CT 31-3422 TIM ALLEN 63.80 1034 FAIRWOOD CT 31-3458 DARRYL HOPKINS 72.50 2048 NW 9TH PL 31-3504 LINDA PADDOCK 60.50 1643 NW 11TH AVE 31-3528 JACK TEATER 60.60 1938 NW 11TH AVE 32--566 BARBARA J. HICKS 55.00 1919 CRESTMONT DR 32--666 CHRIS & A. HOWELL 80.30 395 CRAMMER DR/ 32--872 ROGER F. BECKER 99.40 671 TIFFANY DR 32-1642 JAMES SCHMIDT 53.90 519 W.WATERBURY DR 33---56 TEL-CAR, INC. 113.30 220 E.FAIRVIEW AVE 33-1828 RONALD & J. BELL 47.30 117 E. WOODBURY DR 34--472 SCOTT L. HARDY 80.30 2162 N.ZIRCON PL 34--500 LAYNE MOURITSEN 60.50 2092 N. SAPPHIRE PL 34--504 RONALD ERICKSON 83.60 2096 N.SAPPHIRE PL 34--516 TOMORROWS HOPE SAT. 195.80 2154 N. SAPPHIRE PL • 34--536 JOSEPH & D. COATES 77.00 2115 N.AMETHYST PL 34--832 MICHAEL R. PLETCHER 50.60 968 E.BLUE HERON ST 34--834 DERREK G. HARRIS 80.30 948 E.BLUE HERON ST 34-1036 RONALD & M. LANDON 70.70 1288 E. HUNTER DR 34-1172 CARL & D. QUARENBERG 86.90 2530 N.BLACK BEAR WY 34-1178 STEPHANIE KAHLE 44.00 2590 N.BLACK BEAR WY 34-1844 STEPHEN BUFFATT 199.50 2092 NE 10TH ST. 34-1948 FORREST MOORS 83.60 821 E.WII.,LOWBROOK DR 34-1976 MARJO LACROIX 78.80 1028 CLARENE ST 34-2044 WII,LIAM G. MILLER 90.20 1855 TEARS AVE 34-2104 HEIDI TYLER 87.00 1034 TAMMY ST 34-2760 RICHARD THURBER 87.00 1197 E.COUGAR CREEK DR 34-2832 PINE STREET DEVELOP. 47.30 1258 E. SHARPTAIL ST 42--346 AARON & K. JONES 83.60 2392 E.APRICOT DR 42--376 ROBERT & T. WELCH 207.80 2449 E.APRICOT DR 42--452 THOMAS JORGENSEN 60.50 2409 E.GRAPEWOOD DR 42-1990 JAMES PETTERSON 83.60 2215 N.MEADOWROSE PL 42-2582 LORRI CHAPMAN 60.50 2542 N.MEADOWGLEN PL 42-2734 P. R. HARWARD 85.20 1818 E. GLENLOCH ST. 46--468 KEVIN & T. BORCHARDT 63.90 1071 N.FILLMORE WY 50---12 PAUL H. SMITH 3 8.00 29 E. STATE AVE 50---34 HUBERT HOLLOWAY 92.40 127 E. STATE ST 50--226 JAMES HOWELL 134.30 234 & 236 ESTATE AVE 50--256 ELLEN ROBBINS 67.10 32 E. STATE AVE 50--262 SCOTT MURRI 54.20 12 E. STATE ST 50-1198 WILLIAM GARDOSKI 63.80 1620 E. 2 1/2 ST 50-1468 NORTHVIEW SALON 94.60 17 E. FAIRVIEW AVE 50-2042 JEFF REED INC. 44.00 1390 N.STONEHENGE WY • i 50-2354 OWEN & LARA JONES 50.60 1294 N. SANDLIN AVE 50-2416 KORY HANSEN 57.20 1361 N.PENRITH AVE 50-2444 STEVE & T. MCI~TITT 123.20 1472 N.PENRITH AVE 50-3734 CHERYL CZARNECKI 60.50 907 N.RALSTIN PL 50-4226 R & M HOMES 50.60 1025 N.KII,LDARE PL 50-4506 BETTY B. JACOBSON 43.12 436 E. PINE AVE 51---50 AMYX FAMII,Y LIlVIITED 45.30 37 E.BROADWAY AVE 51--306 MONIKA LITTLE 50.60 412 E.BROADWAY AVE 51--338 AUDIO ELECTRONICS 47.30 242 E.BROADWAY AVE 51--378 HARRY'S BAR 8z GRILL 407.20 704 E. 1ST ST 51--450 MLJRRI'S ELECTRONICS 165.00 131 E. IDAHO AVE 51-=482 RICHARD MLJRRAY 49.60 319 E. IDAHO AVE 51-3350 STEVEN GREGORY 44.00 225 E. KING ST 51-3430 ROBERT D.STRASSER 44.00 218 E. KING ST • • 51-3670 DALE BLAKE 123.20 55 E. ADA ST. 51-4200 PHILIP G. LORCHER 73.00 432 E. 2ND ST 52--268 BLIlVIPIES 1464.60 521 SE 1ST- ST 68---70 TONY ARES 33.00 2599 S.WEBER RAPIDS PL. 69--498 JOSEPH & K.ZEHRUNG 171.12 1072 E. SHEPHERD ST 69--524 PAT & B. ELORDI 100.10 1082 E.PEA000K ST 69--750 COLLEEN KANGAS 47.30 1629 S.GOLDSMITH AVE 69-1240 DOUG HART 90.20 423 E.TOBAGO CT 69-1620 MICHAEL L.BACHMAN 63.80 1836 SE 5TH WAY 72--164 LOUIE & J. BONFRISCO 160.60 1958 S. COVEY PL. 74---18 ALFRED & J. HOCKLEY 47.60 43 SW 7TH AVE 74-=-94 - RANDY WINWOOD 187.30 671 PENNWOOD ST 74--350 GARY E. FRANK 60.50 638 HANOVER CT 74-1084 EDWARD & M. NEALE 86.90 102 W. 1ST ST •. 74-1508 MERIDIAN-ID PROPERTIES 32.00 725 S.MERIDIAN ST 74-2350 THOMAS HAZZARD 33.00 1031 CRESTWOOD DR 74-2456 MALCOM & T. PRINCE 58.30 1224 W. KIlVIltA ST. 74-2540 LONNIE GAM1~~L 44.00 1207 W. KIlVIRA ST 74-2572 GWEN BISCHOFF 44.00 941 W.PENNWOOD ST 74-2616 NOEL & M.PETERSON 47.30 971 W. KINIItA ST 74-2640 JIlVIMY & D. MARLETT 119.90 890 W.PENNWOOD ST 74-2644 SHARON HOUSE 50.60 877 W.PENNWOOD ST 74-2662 DAVID HANSEN 53.90 468 S.OUTFIELD WY 74-2764 BRYAN K. ROPP 67.10 1476 W.CRESTWOOD DR 74-2834 MICHAEL MCCORMICK 60.50 1289 W.CRESTWOOD DR 74-2846 ROD MIDLEY 73.70 479 S. SPOONBII.L AVE 74-2850 JAMES G. CHEESBROUGH 67.10 519 S. SPOONBILL AVE • r 74-3014 DAVID & L. ARY 53.50 672 S. PELICAN WY 74-3022 RICHARD & G. GRAY 86.90 1063 W. LOON ST 74-3076 FRANK & N. STOPPELLO 47.90 1038 W. LOON ST 74-3108 KEVIN & S. BURKHEAD 56.40 937 W. EGRET DR 74-3238 DEBRA RULE 57.20 1134 W. GREENHEAD DR Number of Turnoffs: 196 Total Amount Due: $16,980.06 {~ F--I ftS M~ • ~ '-' • V U ~ o o ,?~ d ~ U i •o~~ ~ W y ~ W r-r O O.~ U N ~ ~ •--~ ~ ~ ~~~ N ~ ~~~ oaa•~ >, o o ~ UMA U W W a ~~z ar~W w o° _ o ~ a~ °° ~ ~ ~ .~ W 0 . ~ ~ ° o °° a~ ~ N N V H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ? ~ 0 H U N vi i ~ ~ ~ M Ri ~ 4, H i~ ~ v~ H z ~Q ~" ~ v '~ ~ ~ ?~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ d b °~ o V o ,~ . a~ U • -~ C C4 o ~ ~" ~~., p +~+ ~+ ~ U ~ U ~ i ~ ~ o ~ a ~ ~ w~ ~' ~ ~ a b 0 ~. o~ a ~. x ~ ~, ~ '~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ rn ~~„ ~ U A ~~ H~~ ~b~~o ~~~ ~~~~ o ~ ~+ ~ ~~3M~ C7 E-H ~ W U a ~z a as w ~~ ~--~ ..., a ~ ~ ~ o ~U 3 ~ ~ H z b -~ -~ ~ al ~, ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ o ~ an U ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ o r~ ~ .~ py ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ri ~ ~ ~ a, . •~ as d a ~ w interoffice M E M O R A N D U M to: Anna Doty cc: from: Gary D. Smith, PE re: Department Reports-Co ci15/07/96 date: Apri127, 1996 Anna: I have two bid results to present to the City Council at this .meeting. 1. "Digester Mixer Procurement"- Equipment replacement for the anaerobic digesters at the wastewater treatment plant. 2. "Clarifier/Headworlcs Improvement Project"- Improvement of the operation of the treatment process at the wastewater treatment plant. I will have Brad give you. copies of the bid information for distribution to the Mayor and Council. Thanks. ~Q~.,, ~+/zc~ ~g ~ ~` ~ c~o~sn~ su.~.` .x.~,~) T OI.+OK ~ ~.v~nf: I~Irobpb~y sbt~lal ask Yti~.e C. ~- from the desk of... Gary D. Smith, PE Public Works Director City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83641 208-881-211 I Fax: 108-887-1197 or 108-881-4813