Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 02-20MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 6,1996: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 12,1996: (APPROVED) TABLED NOVEMBER 8,1995: VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED UNTIL MARCH 19, 1996) 2. TABLED NOVEMBER 8,1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK COMPANY: (TABLED UNTIL APRIL 16, 1996) 3. TABLED FEBRUARY 6,1996: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH: (TABLED UNTIL MARCH 5, 1996) 4. TABLED FEBRUARY 6,1996: FINAL PLAT FOR HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO.6 BY JOHN EDDY: (APPROVED; APPROVE CC&R'S) 5. ORDINANCE #724 - BILL HOWELL ANNEXATION: (APPROVED) 6. ORDINANCE #725 - JEFF LOFFER VACATION OF EASEMENT: (APPROVED) 7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-0 BY MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT: (APPROVE FINDINGS; CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE ORDINANCE) 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY DAVE LEADER: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO MARCH 5, 1995) 9. TINA SAYKO: CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS ABOUT IDAHO TRUSS: (MAYOR, COUNCILMAN MORROW, POLICE CHIEF TO MEET WITH IDAHO TRUSS) 10. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR TEN MILE SQUARE: (APPROVED FOR ONE YEAR) 11. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR GEMTONE CENTER: (TABLED UNTIL MARCH 5, 1996) 12. N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD WIDTH IMPROVEMENT AT AVEST PROPERTY: (STICK WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT) 13. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: • 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 20, 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, Ron Tolsma, Glenn Bentley, Charles Rountree: OTHER PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Brad Watson, John Shipley, Malcolm MacCoy, Judy Haskell, Boy Scout Troop #82, Iry Olen, Tom Ensley, Dave Leader, Don Brian, Larry Arnold: Corrie: Before I start with the agenda, I would like to welcome the Boy Scout Troop #82 from Meridian here tonight, welcome guys. MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 6,1996: Corrie: You have the minutes, any corrections or alterations? Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would like to cover two things, one is a motion to amend the agenda for Iry Olen of APA to make a small presentation after the minutes have been approved. Corrie: Okay, motion has been made to amend the agenda to have Iry speak to us. Rountree: Second Corrie: Second by Mr. Rountree, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow: The second motion would be to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held February 6, 1996. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held February 6, 1996, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 12,1996: Corrie: You have those in front of you, how do you wish to do those? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve the minutes of the Special meeting held February 12, 1996. Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 2 Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma that the minutes of the special meeting held February 12 be approved, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Irv, you are on the agenda. Olen: My name is Iry Olen with the Ada Planning Association, I would like to present tonight a summary of a twenty year transportation plan that we are about to take to the Ada Planning Association Board for their final action. A process that has been underway for the past two and a half years and that looks at twenty year transportation needs. We are under a bit of a deadline to get that done by the next APA board meeting on February 26 because of certain Federal requirements etc. We have been escalating this process somewhat. We started out with what we think a fairly novel and investment in public involvements. In addition to some of the normal public involvement activities that you would follow we did do a number of public surveys that was scientifically controlled to make sure that they did represent the lay person out there the rank and file if you will. Those early surveys that we conducted about transportation we learned a couple of important things. First of all the folks are telling us that they supported long range planning and that once we develop plans we ought to follow through with implementation. There was a lot of public sentiment for preserving future rights of way, future corridors things like that. There was also a reaffirmation that I suppose you could say of people's desire to continue to use the automobile as the dominant mode. But there was support for other forms of transportation. We also had a series of focus groups that we tried. The intent of which was to basically give us feedback from again groups that were selected randomly to see what their thoughts were about transportation and they pretty much echoed the things that I just described we came out of the survey. Finally we formed a, we called a community team, we had a 100 folks invited to participate from all sectors really of the community in Ada County. I know the City of Meridian was represented by at least nine folks on that committee including your current Mayor, Councilman Tolsma, former Councilman Yerrington, and several Planning and Zoning Commission members and School Board members that sort of thing. That community teams job was to take the public interest and to form a transportation vision to help direct where the plan is going to go and then finally to develop basically the plan itself. They had a total of four different meetings, they were several hours in duration each meeting. They were set up instructed as workshops and basically the folks involved in that community team helped shape what the plan is about. It was again a somewhat novel approach, we are looking at County wide planning and we needed people who represented all different perspectives of transportation. We had neighborhood groups there, we had the freight trucking industry 0 0 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 3 there. Many staff and policy officials there, they had legislators. By many accounts it was a successful process. So that group basically came up with a recommendation that came into the plan. Finally once the plan was drafted a plan was developed. We used a surveying tool again to get the publics reaction. Again the rank and file reaction to what the plan recommendations are. After I go through and summarize some of the projects that are in the plan for the City of Meridian, I would like to go through and summarize the results of that survey. We think that was a novel approach and we think it gives our elected officials very good feedback about what is being proposed in the plan and the reaction and support if you will from the public. As far as the City of Meridian I think most of your received a copy of a summary of the transportation roadway projects that were developed for Councilman Bentley that identifies summarize what the projects for the City of Meridian and I would just like to highlight those. There are a number of projects which we consider committed, projects that are in the 5 and 6 year budgets and well I won't list all 5 or 6 that are listed there they do have a price tag of over $12 million. They are projects that have been in the planning process for a number of years and represent really the current funded investment of transportation projects that would affect Meridian. The next list that is contained in the plan is what we call recommendations to build within the next 20 years. Some of these would be needed based on our growth projections. The ones that are listed there have a total of price tag of almost $28 million for the City of Meridian and the area of impact. The projects though not in the current budget, are intended to be built within the 20 year time frame. Then the final part of that list and for the City of Meridian it is quite a few projects and with quite a dollar investment. Is what we described as preservation, they are projects that depending on growth will be needed sometime in the future, maybe not in the next 20 years but it is important that those projects be preserved so that in the future they can be developed. As we monitor the growth patterns and we look at the various comprehensive plan changes these projects could be added into subsequent updates of the transportation plan. The opportunities of protection of the corridors where these projects would be would have been made. I think we can site a lot of examples where that has probably not been done. This is an opportunity to look at a little further ahead than 20 years and preserve the corridor. The estimated cost of those projects in current dollars it pretty hefty, it is over $57 million if they were all to be built. So those are the major transportation projects and corridors that have been identified for the City of Meridian. In addition the plan does envision a balanced transportation system and does envision a system of bike paths and walk ways, ride sharing, park and ride lots those kinds of things. Also public transportation expansion. I was here a couple of weeks ago to talk about an effort we have been working with Canyon County on called the Treasure Valley transportation analysis and many of the things I presented there about having regional transit focus is also contained in the recommended 2015. We envision over the next 20 years that the urbanized areas of Ada County and Canyon County would be receiving public transportation services, we estimate that total public transportation system would cost in the neighborhood of $20 million a year in current dollars and would be paid Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 4 for by some kind of a special tax much like some of the larger urban areas in the vicinity northwest. The estimates we came up with was 4 tenths of a percent sales tax provide that or in the case of Portland they use an employee or payroll tax and again that would be about 4 tenths of a percent. So that is really a summary of what the transportation plan envisions. The plan also has quite a bit of an emphasis in the vision portion of the statement. In fact the visions are what kind of shape of what the plan. There are six of them and I would like to summarize what the vision statements are. These were acted on by the APA Board last September and were developed by this community team that I described earlier. The first reason states that the transportation plan will support the goals of the various Comprehensive Plans and that the Comprehensive Plans will promote coordinated regional development. It goes a little bit further to recognize the growth that is occurring in Canyon County and the need to have a perspective a regional perspective of transportation demand particularly inter -county travel. The next vision identifies what the public really told us about continuing to see the automobile as the dominant mode, people in Idaho and Ada County like their vehicles. The plan envisions that we would continue to plan for the automobile but it also calls for balance and sets as a goal 25% of all the trips would be either ride sharing or transit or walk, bike that sort of thing. The current estimate is about 17% of the trips are using other than drive alone. So it is an aggressive proposal in the plan to look at the needs of alternative transportation. The next vision has to do with financing and it places an emphasis on using user fees and impact fees to finance the transportation system. Basically it states that we need to reduce the reliance on general revenue sources to fund transportation. As you know the current legislator is considering statewide some proposed increases in gas tax and vehicle registration fees. One proposal is that half that money would come back down to the locals for Ada County that would mean well over $2 million a year of additional revenue and in order to afford the system that was identified in the plan it was the next 20 years for additional road improvements. The plan does envision an need for some additional funds for the Ada County Highway District to meet the transportation and roadway needs. The next vision is growing public concern for protecting existing neighborhoods and quality of life to our transportation decisions. In a sense what that vision says is that the planned roadways would be the ones that would be identified for future expansion and improvements. But we should not be expanding roadways that aren't in the 20 year plan particularly those that would affect the neighborhoods. The plan does identify where the arterial and collectors are supposed to be in the future. There are a couple of those that are going to have impacts and there is a mitigation element that is intended to soften those, but for those neighborhoods that don't have any arterials and collectors the intent is to protect the neighborhoods. There is a vision that talks about the preservation of long term transportation options, not only protecting future corridors but protecting the capacity of the existing roadways. So that the future transportation needs can better be met and at much less cost than having to go out and buy up new right of way. That seems to be a theme that we heard from many sectors throughout the public involvement process that Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 5 we went through. And finally there is a vision that talks about reasonable mitigation measures that where developed and built neighborhoods do exist and new facilities are required there be some effort to protect those neighborhoods through mitigation. The mitigation intent there would be buffering, screening, that sort of thing. Those are the six visions that were used to guide the development of the transportation plan. Finally when we completed the draft of the transportation plan we did send out a fairly extensive survey to almost 600 citizens and we got back 70% response which is very successful in terms of these kind of surveys. These were randomly selected individuals, they were asked to fill out a very comprehensive survey about their reaction to the recommendations in the plan. I would like to highlight some of the results of that survey. By the way this survey was completed just several weeks ago once the draft plan was developed. First of all most respondents agreed that increasing the use of alternative transportation was a desirable goal although they still continue to support the automobile as the dominant mode. They were asked what their choice might be about paying more to widening existing roads o building new roads and they were somewhat split on that. The majority really wanted both. They recognized the need to have new roads and also the need to widen existing roads. When asked if they were to select a funding source for additional revenue which source would they select, and the overwhelming choice was local fuel taxes. The public told us in a sense that is the user fee that the vision identifies and that was the revenue source of choice. They did support although not as heavily personal property taxes on vehicles or vehicle registration fees but those were very modestly supported. They were fairly clear that they did not think that local sales tax was a viable option. Respondents did support the idea of spending public funds to preserve future right of way. In fact those that even indicated that they could live with a deteriorating roadway system tended to support that. It has a lot of public support. The plan as it stands right now does not address the funding source for just buying rights of way for preserving corridors but it has received a lot of public support. The respondents did agree that bicycle lanes should be added to more and more roads. That there needs to be safe facilities for bike and pedestrian as our transportation system is developed. There was general support for bus improvements, they agree that in the urban areas they should have good bus service, but in some of the outlying areas the respondents indicated they felt perhaps ride sharing, van pools things like that would be appropriate and that we shouldn't look at a county wide full blown transit system. There was a lot of support for spending public dollars to promote car pool and van pool programs as part of that. And there was an awful lot of support for preserving the Union Pacific rail line which has for a long time been a part of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan to protect that corridor. There was a question in there about regional transit authority an entity that could operate regional transit and that didn't receive a whole lot of support, although there was more than 50% supported it, it was really a very moderate support base. A lot of those who did not support that were concerned about having another layer and those who disagreed with that disagreed very strongly with supporting it. When asked how they would, if they were to find new funding sources to support transit which funding Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 6 sources would they prefer, the respondents came up with local sales tax as the one most often supported. There was an exception to that. The ones that were over age 60 did tend to support employee tax which isn't surprising when you think about it. I think the one question that was asked in there that received a negative report and not lot of public support was this option of mitigation. Most folks disagreed that this should be given a high priority for public fund expenditures. The results of this survey basically says that many if not most of the recommendations in the draft 2015 transportation plan does have general public support. These were folks who were randomly selected that hadn't been involved in the process and we think gives our elected officials a pretty good feedback for what the general public feels about this 20 year plan and some of the provisions within it. Well that concludes the comments that I wanted to make on the 2015 plan. We do have a draft document I assume most of you have received it. Our purpose tonight is to give you a chance to review that and see if you have any questions. We are going to be asking the APA Board on Monday the 26th of February to take action on this document and this would be an opportunity to provide feedback to your representatives on the Board and allow us to move forward. Corrie: Thank you Irv, Council any questions or comments? Rountree: Irv, this is the long range plan requirement for transportation in the Ada County correct. Does this list that you have given us reflect what is in the plan the 2015 as well as what is in the (inaudible) for the 6 year program? Olen: Yes it does Councilman Rountree, the transportation improvement program or TIP does include the projects that are listed here as committed over the next 20 years. Rountree: Does that then represent the capital improvement or capital development plan for ACHD with respect to the use of impact fees? Olen: Not exactly, not entirely, generally it does. The impact fees are eligible for adding capacity to the system and the projects shown here are really capacity improvements. But there are also impact fee expenditures on reconstructions and things like that. They do tend to add capacity and the Highway District does have some of those. Generally the list that we have developed for long range capital improvements are what is used by the Highway District. Rountree: So their TIP would include those types of projects. But apparently don't include any from Meridian. Olen: I wouldn't say that, I think the Highway District, Mr. Morrow could probably answer that he is on their committee. 0 • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 7 Morrow: The list for ACHD is substantially longer than this list. This list is not representative of what is going to go on in the City of Meridian or our impact area. It also includes bridges and bridge replacements and the impact fees are used exclusively for increased capacity systems, the stuff that is coming forth on Locust Grove Road and the very near term is not listed on here but is part being paid for with impact fees that portion which increases the capacity of the road. Generally speaking the rule of thumb is the existing center two lanes are done with ACHD funds the increased capacity is done with impact fees. Rountree: Thanks Walt. I have one other question, right of way preservation, corridor preservation if you will, shows a couple projects on here that are pretty sizable. I understand that probably is going to transpire over that 20 year planning window, the acquisition of those rights of way. You might, (inaudible) but it is not explained on this particular piece of paper here. That would be helpful that it is not a $21 million project it is $21 million spent over the period of 20 years to buy the right of way for Ustick widening. Olen: These estimates also include the construction cost. Rountree: That does include construction cost, that is not clear either. Olen: I apologize, it does, even though at this point we are not looking at those preservation only being constructed that would be the estimated cost of right of way. Rountree: So that includes construction. Olen: Yes Corrie: Any further questions? Irv, thank you very much. ITEM #1: TABLED NOVEMBER 8, 1995: VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: Corrie: We have a letter that we received today that they requested that this City Council table this continuing public hearing until March 19, 1996. So I will entertain a motion with Council. Morrow: So moved Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that the continuation of the • 0 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 8 public hearing for variance request be tabled until March 19, 1996, all those approved say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #2: TABLED NOVEMBER 8, 1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK COMPANY: Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I believe that was tabled awaiting the preliminary plat to work its way through the process and I think that preliminary plat is currently at the P & Z. So I believe a table would be appropriate at this time probably at least for 30 days until that preliminary plat gets through. Well, was at the P & Z meeting what was the disposition of the preliminary plat hearing? Berg: The preliminary plat was tabled until the next P & Z meeting to get some questions answered. Corrie: So we are going to need to go probably Morrow: 60 days, Corrie: The second meeting in April would be the 16th of April. Morrow: Alright Mr. Mayor, I would move that we table the annexation and zoning request for Highlands Ranch Subdivision until the second meeting in April which would be April 16th. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma, you have heard the motion, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: TABLED FEBRUARY 6,1996: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH: Corrie: Shari, do we have that development agreement? Stiles: Mayor Corrie and Council 1 am not sure where this development agreement is. I believe he submitted some proposed changes for review by Counsel, but I really don't 0 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 9 remember where that is right now. Corrie: Counselor? 9 Crookston: I am afraid it is a common disease. I did not look into it so I cannot inform the Council as to what the status of that is right now. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we table until our March 5 meeting the development agreement for Salmon Rapids No. 3 Subdivision with the stipulation that the staff have that ready for presentation at that meeting. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow and second by Mr. Rountree that this is tabled to March 5, the development agreement for Salmon Rapids Subdivision No. 3 and be ready for staff comments at that time, all those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: TABLED FEBRUARY 6,1996: FINAL PLAT FOR HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 6 BY JOHN EDDY: Tolsma: (Inaudible) Crookston: I have reviewed those and there are some changes that I believe need to be made with the covenants and with the articles of incorporation for the homeowners association corporation. Morrow: Question Mr. Mayor, are those technical in nature. My question being is that can we approve those CC&R's this evening subject to your review? Crookston: I believe that you can, they are just some changes that need to be made they are not what I would call substantial changes. There are some things in there that need to be done. I think the Council could approve it subject to my approval. Morrow: Point of discussion that would be my preference Mr. Mayor, there is no point in holding up this for Council action. Corrie: I agree. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the covenants and restrictions for 0 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 10 Haven Cove No. 6 by John Eddy subject to City Attorney Crookston's negotiating the changes necessary. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that we approve the restrictive covenants subject to the review of the attorney and with the changes, all those in favor say aye, excuse me any discussion? All those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Rountree: Do we need action on the final plat? Mr. Mayor I move we approve the final plat for Haven Cove subdivision No. 6 by John Eddy. Morrow: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow that we approve the final plat for Have Cove No. 6 subdivision by John Eddy any discussion? All those in favor say aye? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #5: ORDINANCE #724 - BILL HOWELL ANNEXATION: Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 17, T.3N, R.1 E, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have this ordinance read in its entirety? Hearing none I shall ask for a motion. Tolsma: Mr. Mayor, I move we approve Ordinance #724 with suspension of the rules. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Tolsma, second by Mr. Rountree that we accept ordinance #724 with suspension of the rules, any discussion? Roll call vote Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I want to speak out against this ordinance. I do not feel that this, that has been addressed the safety issues concerning the increased truck traffic on this issue. I do not believe that this particular project belongs at this site. That is all I have. 0 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 11 Corrie: Thank you Mr. Bentley, any further discussion? Hearing none I shall ask for the vote by roll call. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow - Yea, Bentley - Nea, Rountree - Yea, Tolsma - Yea MOTION CARRIED: 3 Yea, 1 Nea ITEM #6: ORDINANCE #725 - JEFF LOFFER VACATION OF EASEMENT: Corrie: AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF THE EXISTING 20 FOOT UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT BY REDUCING THE WIDTH FROM 20 FEET TO 15 FEET WHICH EASEMENT IS IN THE NORTHERLY 20 FOOT OF LOT 6, BLOCK 1 OF CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 1 A RECORDED SUBDIVISION ON FILE IN BOOK 57 OF PLATS PAGES 5332 AND 5333 RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY IDAHO AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the audience that would like Ordinance #725 read in its entirety? Hearing none I shall entertain a motion for Ordinance #725. Bentley: Mr. Mayor I move we pass this with suspension of rules. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Rountree that ordinance #725 be approved with suspension of the rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma - Yea, Rountree - Yea, Bentley - Yea, Morrow - Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-0 BY MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT: Corrie: Is there anybody here from the Meridian Free Library District? At this time I will officially open the public hearing. Tom Ensley, 1197 Main, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Ensley: May I borrow the easel? On the very favorable endorsement of the community in November for a new library facility the Library District has selected a site as described here on North of Cherry, East of 13th Avenue, it is a little over 2 acres, 2.22 acres. It is presently the original location of a farm site, there is a little farm house located near Cherry • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 12 • Lane and then a barn and some out buildings and so forth. There is an open ditch, irrigation ditch that serves some local deliveries. On this site that we are proposing for the rezone we are proposing to construct a 30,000 square foot facility. There will be parking just off of Cherry and then at the rear at the north of the building with a circular drive around the perimeter of the site. Parking, we are providing parking for 78 cars the code requires, according to the code for a 30,000 square foot building it requires 75 parking spaces. That includes handicap parking and those kinds of facilities. On the site we will be providing on site of course retention of drainage. Meeting, we have run the program through ACHD and they have given preliminary approval. We are accommodating all of the setbacks, all of the parking and driveways are within the setback boundaries. We are landscaping we have a landscape boundary around the perimeter of the site. There is presently a six foot cedar fence on both the west and the north sides. We will be providing screening on the east property line. I mentioned that we are, we will have on site drainage, the facility itself, oh yes, I want to address the question about lighting, we will of course be providing full security lighting but it will be on low poles, shielded taking into consideration the fact that it is located within a residential area. We are trying to be very sensitive to that condition. The design of the building again attempting to be compatible with the neighborhood we are designing with a long sloped roof, dormers in the roof to give it again a residential character recognizing of course that there is no way that this size of a building there aren't very many 30,000 square foot houses in the area but it does give it we feel a somewhat of a residential character to be compatible with a neighborhood. It is an excellent location for this kind of a facility close to the schools and we are very excited about this about the potential. So I think that concludes my remarks, if there are questions? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have a question with respect to at one time it was my understanding that there was going to be a life estate given to the property owner? Also it is indicated in these findings of fact and conclusions that may no longer be the case. Can you enlighten us on that please? Ensley: I certainly will, when it was presented initially to the Planning and Zoning well as of the application was made to Planning and Zoning that was the case. However that changed as we presented to the, the very day that we presented to P & Z so we weren't able to indicate that on the site plan. We did not have time, it was located here at the corner but that request was taken away so that no longer is a part of the program. There is no other occupancy requested on this site. Morrow: At this point in time then this will be a clean project to the extent that there will be no residential living on this site. Ensley: Correct, it will be as you see it here. Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 13 Morrow: Thank you. Rountree: You indicated the east would be screened you continue the same types of things. Ensley: Yes, it will however be heavily landscaped also but other than a hedge would be difficult to completely screen it with the landscaping. So we will be Tolsma: (Inaudible) putting the light poles on the exterior boundaries (inaudible) Ensley: That could very well be what we are doing. We haven't really, the electrical engineer is just in the process now of laying that out but we have talked at length about that. The sensitivity of being concerned about problems. Tolsma: (Inaudible) six foot fence and the lighting (inaudible) what type of security (inaudible) Ensley: It will be lit, it will have 24 hour lighting, a lower level than would be during business ours. That is another question that came up, I might address that about business hours. They will be in operation, the library will be in operation from 9 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday, from 9 a.m. 6 p.m. on Friday, and Saturday from 10 to 5 p.m.. So this will be essentially during daylight and early evening hours. Morrow: Would you cover for me again the residential fence that you are going to screen the residential, what is it composed of? Ensley: The existing residential fences? Morrow: No you are going to incorporate Ensley: We will probably carry the same, they are 6 foot cedar solid cedar fences. So it will probably be similar in character. The property to the east there is not at this point, this residence is set quite a ways away from it from the site. There is quite a distance from this property line and the residence where these residents here are closer to the property line. Corrie: Any further comments are questions? Thank you sir, anyone else from the public that would like to comment this is a public hearing? Judy Haskell, 1365 West Yost Court, was sworn by the City Attorney. LI Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 14 u Haskell: Just questioning, he seems like he has addressed the lighting issue, but how short is a short light pole? The other question I would have is what kind of noise impact is this going to have on the area. What is the spacing between the building itself and the homes around it, the square footage or whatever you want to call it the space available there. My worst nightmare is that I can imagine air conditioning and everything kicking in in the middle of the night beside the lighting in there in the residential. Corrie: Thank you, anyone else from the public that would like to give testimony on this? Hearing none I will ask that you please come and (inaudible). Ensley: The question about the light poles, I don't know at this point in time if I can give you exact height, the ordinance I believe says 35 feet but I doubt if they will be that high. They will probably, I hate to say at this point, but they will meet the ordinance and again I can only assure that we will be very sensitive to that and they are not going to be up there shining over the neighborhood. Secondly the noise level again it would be difficult for me to give you, I think we are all familiar with city libraries and it will be to the benefit of the library and the community of course it is going to be very heavily monitored and that I know in our discussions the librarian and the board both are concerned this does not become a kids hang out. As we are designing the building the design is for easy monitoring of both exterior and interior areas for that very reason. Again there is a very strong sensitivity to their being any kinds of congregation problems. Morrow: I have a question, with respect to your building setbacks what are the setbacks from the property line? Ensley: Oh yes that is right that was a question. Well from the rear setback we are about 60 feet, from the west setback to this which is a blank wall we are 30 feet, and then from the children's library oh boy probably more like 50 feet, 45 or 50 feet and then on the east side we are 35 feet from the property line. Morrow: A follow up question, placement of mechanical units? Ensley: The mechanical room will be in this location here, and there probably will be a small cooling tower at the back off of the back of the mechanical room. Morrow: And you will screen those for both sight and sound sensitivity? Ensley: Yes. Morrow: I have no more questions. • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 15 Rountree: I have one question, would it be possible to gate your access loop to the back of the building to eliminate pass through traffic in the evening or would it create a safety problem in terms of fire protection? Ensley: It definitely would from a fire protection standpoint. Corrie: The fire department could get a key or whatever they require for that to open that that would be fine. Rountree: If that became an issue that would be a possibility? Ensley: Definitely right. Tolsma: (Inaudible) Ensley: After hours, it would be a definite disadvantage during areas for staff to drive though and so forth, but that would be certainly something we can consider yes. Corrie: Any further questions? Is there anyone else from the public that would like to give any testimony? Hearing none I shall close the public hearing. Mr. Counselor, any comments, any change, significant. Crookston: I think that the testimony has been basically the same as was before Planning and Zoning. I think that I don't have my notes for P & Z right before me. I don't specifically recall Mrs. Haskell testifying her statements could be included in the findings and I think that they probably should but I could do that easily and have you go ahead and approve the Planning and Zoning findings and direct that an ordinance be prepared and I would, if that is the case change (End of Tape) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: (Inaudible) incorporated in terms of (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Motion made and seconded to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law with amendments. MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Motion made and seconded to approve the rezone request. 0 0 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 16 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Motion made and seconded to have the City Attorney prepare an ordinance. MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY DAVE LEADER: (Discussion Inaudible) Dave Leader, 110 Parkway Drive, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Leader: Mr. Mayor and Councilman, basically this is (inaudible) approved earlier some changes were required because Avest's plans have changed when they decided to put mini -storage to the north (inaudible). So basically the street (inaudible) changed the street to loop around some. ACHD wanted a second access to the north (inaudible) so that is just of the changes from the original preliminary plat that (inaudible). We have submitted a variance request for lots 3 and 4, for block 3 to (inaudible) radius lots there and (inaudible) they are large lots and one I think is over 8500 square feet and the other is 9000 square feet (inaudible) 6500 minimum square foot lot size. (Inaudible) we had to ask for a variance for those. I don't know if there is any comments that I need to make (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Don Brian, 2070 North Locust Grove, was sworn by the City Attorney. Brian: I think all of you gentlemen know why I am here (inaudible) irrigation problems that I have been experiencing. (Inaudible) there is so much I don't know where to start. This is the first (inaudible) I went through this same procedure and 1 just (inaudible) concerns of timing and the different things (inaudible). Since then we have had numerous problems, numerous meetings and a lot of (inaudible) trying to get these things taken care of (inaudible). May 19, 1994 Bruce Freckleton (inaudible) until this problem was taken care of. (Inaudible) special meeting by Wayne Crookston and we all talked about what the problem was and what needed to be done. September 15 was the date of the meeting and there was supposed to be a hearing the 21 st (inaudible). Well, it was addressed, the problem (inaudible) and he agreed to tile the ditch and make the problem go away from me and get my irrigation water (inaudible). Now this agreement came about March 3, 1995 and this is the agreement that Wayne Crookston drew up on how to resolve the problem. (Inaudible) it states on (inaudible) paragraph four on page two says, "where as Leader 0 • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 17 stated that (inaudible) and dig ditches deep enough to handle (inaudible)." Page three states that Leader will tile the ditch that runs along for an (inaudible) that all of the above shall be accomplished on or before April 1st 1995. (Inaudible) on holding back these things just to get the work done. (Inaudible) on the lots I would imagine (inaudible) clean outs along there I don't know where my access, I have to go door to door (inaudible) because it goes all through Packard Subdivision and down Wingate and Dove Meadows and Avest property. (Inaudible) I would like to make a comment about the same lateral upstream in Packard No. 1 as it comes off the main lateral (inaudible) Planning and Zoning. Started that process October 1994 and I said that I would like to see them get this ditch tiled (inaudible) taken care of and then they can (inaudible) is they developed (inaudible). It is something that needs to be addressed (inaudible) so what (inaudible) in the findings the (inaudible) on page 14, paragraph 16, that all ditches, canals, waterways, required to be tiled by the ordinance shall be tiled as a condition of annexation when annexed. If not so tiled the property shall be subject to de -annexation. That is the first copy of the findings. Then I got a second copy when it went through findings again, and then it stated that the Assistant to the Engineer commented and they are incorporated herein (inaudible) the irrigation district or irrigation ditches that cross the property shall be tiled herein. And then again on page 14 (inaudible) tiled by City ordinance shall be tiled as a condition of annexation and (inaudible) subject to de -annexation. Those were from the (inaudible) meeting, the minutes of the Planning and Zoning meeting. Now I have (inaudible) from September I have these out of order (inaudible) pertains to development time schedules and requirement, 11-9-605 M, (inaudible) that will meet with and comply that section. Well that section states that the time that it takes to get these ditches buried (inaudible) before the final phase or what they did to get around this deal. But it starts as (inaudible) meet and comply with the ordinances of the City of Meridian. That is the one that pertains to the piping of ditches (inaudible) So I don't know (inaudible). March 27, 1995 is when I got my problem taken care of (inaudible) another head gate and (inaudible). One of my other concerns is does anyone really know what is going on with Dixie Lane which is the road that separates the Dove Meadows development and the the (inaudible) now have new (inaudible) I was wondering what my access would be to my head gate (inaudible). Also my (inaudible) would be the easterly section of this development (inaudible). Right now there is a (inaudible) that is no man's land, it belongs to the Church property, (inaudible) but again when you (inaudible) try and enforce (inaudible). I guess that is (inaudible). (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: (Inaudible) Brian: I don't know who owns it because Nampa Meridian (inaudible). Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 18 Morrow: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Brian: (Inaudible) piping the ditches before they sign the final plat. Morrow: (Inaudible) Brian: Like we have here, we have a final for phase one, the ditch is in phase 2. Morrow: The ditch is in phase 2 then it won't be required (inaudible) Brian: That is exactly my point that is (inaudible) is they develop phase one and (inaudible) now Planning and Zoning. Will knows how many times I have been down here trying to get things done. (Inaudible) how much time and money do we have to spend on making them do something they agreed to do. Morrow: (Inaudible) Brian: This particular development, the ditch that we are talking about was not even there on phase one. He rerouted that ditch and put it over to phase 2. It ran through phase 1, de did phase one and moved the ditch over to phase 2 and (inaudible) still hasn't been tiled (inaudible). My question is what means do we have (inaudible) you have to do it (inaudible) and that just put us all (inaudible). Morrow: (Inaudible) so that has changed substantially (inaudible) Brian: I guess I will be here on every phase of Packard then and going through this same thing. That is what I am trying to avoid. I have better things to do than sit here and take your guys time. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Brian: That is another thing I don't think, I don't know if that has been done or where that is. (Inaudible) short of (inaudible). (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: Mr. Mayor, before you close the public hearing I would like to hear Mr. Leader's comments with respect to Mr. Brian's points and (inaudible) in terms of both Gary's and Shari's comments (inaudible). Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 19 (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: My first question would be (inaudible) Mr. Brian's points with respect to the (inaudible). Leader: I can make some brief comments there. One, as far as irrigation water and Mr. Brian's property that irrigation ditch does not go through my property, it goes through the Wingate property (inaudible) there on the Packard property (inaudible) between Don's water and water that services my property (inaudible). Mr. Brian's problem I believe (inaudible) problem with an undersized pipe down the line from his property. When this water was re-routed it was not done without consulting with the neighbors, Avest wanted to abandon the ditch that was on their property (inaudible) that re-routed and (inaudible) system through the Avest property (inaudible) before the ditch was re-routed. I have participated with Avest and (inaudible) that is in that ditch now takes it to my north property line and (inaudible) is abandon that ditch and that box is set up so (inaudible) all the water would come through the same pipe (inaudible) I believe this is the simplest way to handle the problem (inaudible) easy access to the water. (Inaudible) ACHD requires a clean out box on either side of the street and I believe there are two boxes (inaudible) that would be in people's back yards (inaudible) Morrow: Let me ask you this then, (inaudible) Leader: (Inaudible) the ditch that is on my property (inaudible) that water is all in one ditch and (inaudible) and Don will get his water out of that (inaudible) the irrigation plans to Public Works last summer for this and the other side. So I believe (inaudible) get that pipe put in and (inaudible). Morrow: (Inaudible) lock on that to prevent kids from (inaudible). Leader: (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Leader: I don't think we ever had any question, I guess there was a question of they have a 50 foot easement and they need 60 foot because of the collector street (inaudible) granting that. (Inaudible) 50 foot easement is still there (inaudible) but so far I haven't' received it. Morrow: I have a question with respect to (inaudible) before P & Z (inaudible) Leader: There is a one acre property to the north of (inaudible) in the northwest corner 0 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 20 C� which I would want (inaudible) I think they are still in the county, so we would plan on fencing that. (Inaudible) and likewise the same situation with the Packard Subdivision. Morrow: (Inaudible) with respect to the landscaping issue and how those things can be resolved. You indicate, I guess my question here is my interest is (inaudible) to solve the issues of phase one to make sure they don't occur in phase 2. Leader: There are some very valid complaints with the landscaping (inaudible) phase one it related to not having enough irrigation water, sprinkler (inaudible) to sprinkle the landscaping. The pressurized system of the church takes care of part of that, they were required to disconnect from City water my understanding is (inaudible) so we were without any sprinkler system for about (inaudible) changed the policies so we couldn't get meter permits without building permits. So we had no way to water those easements until houses built. In phase 2 we have pressurized irrigation system and the pressurized irrigation system will be in all of those easement areas so we don't have the problem with the water (inaudible) landscaping in. Morrow: Are you indicating that in phase one the common area is done by easement and there is no pressurized irrigation available. Leader: That is not exactly right, we have a pressurized irrigation system that (inaudible) on the east side up to Apricot. The rest of those, those are on easements too (inaudible) strictly easements on those lots and they are tied into the individual lot owner's systems. (End of Tape) . (Discussion Inaudible) Leader: The common (inaudible) that the association is responsible for the (inaudible) but they are (inaudible). The only thing the association owns in phase one are the entry islands (inaudible) that is the only deeded common area that was there. In phase 2 (inaudible) common areas and drainage lots that are (inaudible) so there is actually more property that belongs to the homeowners association to start with. Morrow: I guess I am at a loss here to figure out how the relationship between the church and the subdivision, what I am driving at here is that it seems to me that there needs to be some method of (inaudible) so that I don't quite understand (inaudible) and so on and so forth (inaudible) Leader: I think it is like basically any association (inaudible). I am not sure the church's pressurized irrigation system (inaudible) most all of the landscaping the church has there. As part of that situation (inaudible) they agreed to allow me to extend the pressurized • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 21 • irrigation system to serve the backs of those lots in block 1 in (inaudible) maintenance cost for their pumping station. Morrow: Is the church part of the homeowners association for the subdivision? Leader: No they are not. Morrow: So then basically the church (inaudible) hostage for water? Leader: Well I suppose they could. Morrow: That wouldn't appear to me to be in the best interest of the homeowners association. Leader: Well I think what probably needs to be done (inaudible) covers that, that says they will provide water (inaudible) Morrow: (Inaudible) I guess what I am after here is that (inaudible) Leader: I agree Morrow: I think those are all the questions that I have. (Discussion Inaudible) Brian: (Inaudible) as far as pressurized irrigation I (inaudible) for the easements in the lots (inaudible) he is not going to tie into the water (inaudible) pressurized irrigation coming from? How is he going to (inaudible) I would like to get some of that stuff taken care of before (inaudible). Thank you. Morrow: Questions for staff, Shari (inaudible) have they been addressed by (inaudible) I guess my major concern is item #9 (inaudible) easement (inaudible) separate lots (inaudible) Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Council, I don't believe I have had response to any of these items. I would have to double check but that is part of the response I would expect to see on a revised plat. Morrow: My next question was this was approved (inaudible) Stiles: Yes it was. Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 22 Morrow: (Inaudible) Stiles: I could (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: Gary, your site specific requirements have those been addressed? Smith: (Inaudible) Morrow: And there is a variance coming with respect to (inaudible) the lots 3 and 4 of Block 3 (inaudible) Smith: I haven't seen a variance but it is my understanding (inaudible) variance would need to be requested and approved by (inaudible). Morrow: (Inaudible) applicant shall provide a statement as to the ownership (inaudible) has that all been done? Smith: (Inaudible) final design, it is my understanding (inaudible) for Dove Meadows and Wingate (inaudible) I don't t know if that concept has changed or not. Morrow: In terms of that concept (inaudible) being done such (inaudible) At what point in time would these things need to be done. Smith: This design (inaudible) which would be done at the same time of the final plat (inaudible) Corrie: Does Council have any further questions? (Inaudible) Morrow: I guess for point of discussion from my perspective we have covered a lot of (inaudible) preliminary plat seems to me like (inaudible) I would like to have a little bit of time (inaudible) in terms of addressing some of these conditions that need to be addressed. I would like to see them addressed (inaudible). I recognize that we have a shot at this (inaudible) fairness to the developer and the citizens that already reside in phase 1 and Mr. Brian it seems to me like we (inaudible) so that the developer (inaudible) so I guess what I am saying is that I would like to see (inaudible) and maybe address this issue of (inaudible) and having said that if the Council (inaudible) action on the preliminary plat. (Discussion Inaudible) • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 23 Crookston: (Inaudible) it is the preliminary plat that you need to be concerned with. Once you approve that the final plat (inaudible) falls in line with what was supposed to be done or what was said was going to be done on the preliminary plat. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Stiles: Mr. Mayor, yes I believe that it should be to show the landscape lots, the exclusion from the lots of Wingate Lane and as a variance has not yet been granted (inaudible) it will don't' think it should be approved at this time. (Discussion Inaudible) Corrie: (Inaudible) motion to table, is that correct Mr. Crookston, should we (inaudible). (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: Well I think from my perspective is that (inaudible) in my mind there is some confusion (inaudible) these are really the things that (inaudible) about this preliminary plat and I think in terms of (inaudible) and everybody concerned here is that at least from my perspective logical format and that (inaudible) these are the areas of concern (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Crookston: (Inaudible) public hearing should be continued for both possibilities (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) The motion was made and seconded to continue the public hearing to March 5, 1996 meeting. MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #9: TINA SAYKO: CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS ABOUT IDAHO TRUSS: (Discussion Inaudible) Arnold: (Inaudible) We are living in a commercial residential zone and we have noise pollution, sexual harassment, (inaudible) trucks constantly going in and out of our neighborhood. We are living on the residential half of the street and Idaho Truss is on the commercial side. So we have to share, we have to share the space there. Our main problem is the noise pollution (inaudible) midnight and we are home in be at 8, 9, 10 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 24 o'clock whatever. (Inaudible) machinery running until midnight and they also have music blaring and screaming and yelling (inaudible) crew shut down (inaudible) residential end we need to go to bed and we need to get up and (inaudible) problem for us there. (Discussion Inaudible) Arnold: What we have is the noise and the constant comings and goings of trucks and we have construction workers whistling at the women and that is the (inaudible) it is not a real desirable thing. (Inaudible) Arnold: What we are looking for is really is there an ordinance, I mean can they actually run their crews in a commercial residential zone can they run their crews until midnight is that, if that is within their rights of course then they are going to do it. We haven't been (inaudible) what the code is, if they can do that or not. (Discussion Inaudible) Arnold: What we are looking at is building some sort of (inaudible) possibly from keeping litter from travelling in the wind from yards and also to block some visual contact with the workers. Also we do not want to obstruct their (inaudible) what we are trying to contain is some of the noise particularly in the summer time when they have their (inaudible) will contain a lot of this noise and a lot of the litter I think will be contained (inaudible) which we have now. (Inaudible) the other (inaudible) is to try and clear up some of the other (inaudible) we have no problems with him unloading the lumber but it does block the street and it does cause driving up and down the street problems (inaudible) both sides of the truck. (Inaudible) we feel that the total property around (inaudible) Corrie: Have you talked to them about (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Corrie: It looks like (inaudible) Idaho Truss here? (Inaudible) Morrow: Mr. Mayor I am familiar with the (inaudible). Corrie: (Inaudible) Morrow: (Inaudible) right of way. • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 25 Arnold: (Inaudible) Morrow: I think part of the issue here is that you have (inaudible) between a residential use and Arnold: Well at least we would hope to (inaudible) they actually do have (inaudible) play their stereo loud enough so we can hear it (inaudible) don't have room to build the pallets inside I don't believe so they will come out and (inaudible) 3 to 5 air guns going off and it just sounds like a machine gun. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Arnold: (Inaudible) I don't know (inaudible) also talked to the people at Idaho Truss and they (inaudible) for awhile but I don't know if our noise ordinance because of the zoning and (inaudible) it was the neighbors complaints (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: I had a couple of questions I guess, a large part of the solution is (inaudible) it seems to me that what maybe ought to be appropriate is that (inaudible) probably our enforcement officer (inaudible). Arnold: So they can basically be as loud as they want (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Arnold: (Inaudible) clean up the neighborhood a little bit, it is kind of an eyesore. (Discussion Inaudible) Arnold: (Inaudible) Corrie: (Inaudible) Mr. Morrow's suggestion that the Chief of Police and myself and Mr. Morrow (inaudible) with these complaints and see (inaudible) get back with you. (Inaudible) I think that is (inaudible). Arnold: Is that a civil case or (inaudible). Crookston: I would (inaudible) civil or criminal. Arnold: (Inaudible) 9 • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 26 Corrie: If that meets with your approval we will meet with the owner of Idaho Truss (inaudible) if they don't change we will (inaudible). Again, the sexual harrassment (inaudible) and then we can talk (inaudible). I guess we should do that, Chief (inaudible) Mr. Morrow. Morrow: That is fine. Corrie: We will set up a meeting and get back with you and (inaudible) ITEM #10: REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR TEN MILE SQUARE: Corrie: You have that request in front of you. My understanding is that March 21, 1995 was year of the extension or they want a year extension becuase they are planning on construction but (inaudible) March 21, 1996. The motion was made and seconded to extend approval of the preliminary/final plat for Ten Mile Square for one year. MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #11: COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS FOR GEMTONE CENTER: Corrie: Counselor? Crookston: I have not seen them. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I move that we table those until March 5 for the Counselor to review and report back to the Council. Rountree: (Inaudible) Corrie: Motion by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to table this until March 5 for the Counselor to review, any discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #12: N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD WIDTH IMPROVEMENT AT AVEST PROPERTY: Corrie: (Inaudible) • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 27 (Discussion Inaudible) • Corrie: This was some information that we got from Mr. Smith, (inaudible) Gary do you want to (inaudible) Smith: Mayor and Council (inaudible) I think that what (inaudible) and developer is looking for is what you want to see as far as development of Locust Grove Road is concerned. (Inaudible) if this is the same picture (inaudible) if it isn't (inaudible) time is critical becuase (inaudible) such that (inaudible) first of June. (Inaudible) the Highway District has (inaudible) I have been told (inaudible) and (inaudible) June 1st (inaudible) that means (inaudible) Pat Dobie is retained by Fred Meyer and he made a report based on information (inaudible) as far as development is concerned in the area. (Inaudible) as I recall his recommendation is the 3 lane, center tum lane and two traffic lanes. (Inaudible) that would be in the existing (inaudible) capable of supporting traffic to the year 2015 which is the 2015 destination (inaudible). Our policy has been four traffic lanes (inaudible). The letter that you have in front of you from the Highway District is a response (inaudible). As you can see (inaudible) I think that Avest or Fred Meyer well they need to know how to proceed (inaudible) and I guess you can say they are caught between the desires of the City of Meridian and the desires of the Highway District (End of Tape) (Inaudible) Pat Dobie is here and he could probably (inaudible) my recollection from the design plans (inaudible) provided to us is that (inaudible) center turn lane and (inaudible+ south bound on Locust Grove (inaudible), is that correct. So you now have those (inaudible) at that point it begins to taper on the east side or on the Avest side and it tapers 200 and some feet to what would be a 3 lane section (inaudible). That is the section that the Highway District (inaudible) continue north (inaudible) to Ustick and that section would fit within the street improvements that have been made north of the Avest project (inaudible)> I don't know if you recall but some of the discussion that was provided (inaudible) Tract subdivision the Highway District was only accepting 66 feet of right of way in roads. (Inaudible) on each side of the 66 feet to get us to 80 feet. That is what we were pushing for pretty hard which we eventually obtained from the Highway District and then that increased to 90 feet (inaudible). Right now without removing curb and gutter the sidewalk that has been built north of the Avest site that street section will accommodate three lane roadway that has 2 travel lanes and a center turn lane and leave room for striping for a bike lane (inaudible) two north bound, two south bound, no center turn lane. (Inaudible) at your last meeting you talked about widening the intersection areas I think there were 5 or 6 between Locust Grove and Ustick Road such that the center turn lane could be accommodated within the 4 travel lane section. That would require the removal of some of the (inaudible) to do that. It just takes another 11 or 12 feet I think for a turn lane. I would day the Highway District is (inaudible) and they decided that there is significant amount of dollars involved and improving Locust Grove to a five lane section versus a three lane or four lane section that the existing improvements would 10 Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 28 accommodate. They feel it is appropriate because the traffic projection is such that it is 20 years but a three lane (inaudible) three or four lane will accommodate the traffic projection to the year 2015. That the section doesn't need rebuilt to the five lane standard that we requested on (inaudible). Rountree: So what is the difference between what ACHD wants versus what is in the development agreement versus what Pat is recommending in the three lanes? I am still not clear (inaudible) Smith: Councilman Rountree, I do know what the specifics of the development agreement are. I understand from talking with (inaudible) there aren't any specifics in the development agreement (inaudible) Rountree: (Inaudible) Smith: I don't know why (inaudible) I am sorry I can't answer your question. Morrow: Let me (inaudible) section line roads we require 90 foot of right of way (inaudible) I guess the issues in my mind is that Mr. Sale was before us last meeting (inaudible) particular plans (inaudible) 5 or 6 items in here that stipulate that is to be a five lane section line road with bicycle lanes. (Inaudible) $1.2 million budgeted for the rebuild of Locust Grove road from Ustick Road to Fairview Avenue. Essentially north of there we have all residential uses and R-4 zoning we are talking about (inaudible). I guess the question in my mind is that (inaudible) is that apparently we are going to get to (inaudible) we get a letter from ACHD saying this is the way your City is going to be (inaudible) conditions that were set upon them from (inaudible) City Council has never (inaudible) ACHD doesn't want to participate apparently (inaudible) the problem that Fred Meyer is having in terms of (inaudible). The bottom line is here that (inaudible) the issue is that (inaudible) that there is a major (inaudible) brewing between the City of Meridian and ACHD and 1 think that is also fair to say with respect to some of the other western cities. And so the issue is that (inaudible) pretty good working partnership has fallen by the wayside. I see it as a bigger issue for us as a City than just a question of Fred Meyer opening. (Inaudible) I am not sure what the resolution is. I understand (inaudible) I see the problems being much larger (inaudible) I guess my thoughts in terms of how I see this issue is quite frankly I don't know what the answer is (inaudible) transportation (inaudible) five lanes (inaudible). Perhaps he wasn't aware of the development agreement, by the same token (inaudible) Corrie: (Inaudible) two figures that (inaudible) figure A or B they are both what ACHD says are (inaudible) they are telling us if I am correct that is going to be (inaudible) it doesn't make any difference is that correct? Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 29 Dobie: Mr. Mayor, there is quite a difference the (inaudible) What ACHD is proposing is to taper a (inaudible) lane section into less than a (inaudible) section. If they do that it creates two problems. The first one is that there is not a sufficient width there to install bike lanes and the second one is inconsistent with the transportation element (inaudible) that you construct all section line roads to five lane sections. So the problem here is what (inaudible) is (inaudible). What I recommended is to (inaudible) the major difference between the two plans is the extension of the curb to north of the Avest site and Oakcrest (inaudible) consistent with the east alignment (inaudible) that would then (inaudible) deal with this issue of inconsistency of the two plans. Corrie: Any questions? (Inaudible) as far as this Avest project is concerned (inaudible) Morrow: From ACHD's standpoint the problem is (inaudible) This issue is that it appears to me that (inaudible) maybe it is (inaudible) I think that the necessary (inaudible) because quite frankly (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: Let me address that inconvenience, as the Council and and the Mayor we agreed to (inaudible) based on our input and Mayor Kingsford's input (inaudible) super sensitive to (inaudible) the Americana Bridge (inaudible) allow the persons to recover from ongoing construction (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: I think at the very best the way we have to deal with ACHD is (inaudible) amongst ourselves as to what we have got to do to get more responsive. My feeling has been this year (inaudible) back where we started seven years ago, eight years ago (inaudible) Rountree: I agree, it has gone backwards quickly. Morrow: I guess my question now would be what direction do we go. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: Well I think from my perspective (inaudible) whatever it takes on the part of the City to ensure that (inaudible) Avest has done a tremendous job as far as I am concerned (inaudible) major asset to the City. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) L] Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 30 Morrow: In terms of going to the five lane on your side (Discussion Inaudible) L] Morrow: I guess what my question is how much is the initial length the additional width to be built out (inaudible) so that is the question, what is the cost I guess it boils down to that triangular piece of asphalt that has to be built (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: You are talking (inaudible) $12,000 or $15,000 in terms of additional cost. (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: How do we deal with that, do we require a bond for that for the temporary occupancy or how do we, we have to think that we are talking about making sure that they are open and if it is not built and we don't come to a resolution with ACHD than we get (inaudible) temporary occupancies. The question is what kind of financial guarantee do we require as a City (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Morrow: If we requested a bond for the improvements (inaudible) of the value of the work to be done. (Discussion Inaudible) Smith: (Inaudible) the width of the improvement that we are talking about is north of the loop road. (Inaudible) in the front of Don Brian's residence. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Sweet: (Inaudible) as far as the road, the Highway District the Commission has (inaudible) improved the length of the Avest project and (inaudible) reimburse Fred Meyer (inaudible) improvement cost (inaudible). I want to point out (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Motion made and seconded to stick with the development agreement and to require a five lane road. Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 31 MOTION CARRIED: All Yea (Discussion Inaudible) ITEM #13: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: (Discussion Inaudible) City Engineer Gary Smith introduced Brad Watson the new Assistant City Engineer. Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members it is my pleasure to present to you our newly hired Assistant City Engineer Brad Watson. Brad is an Engineer in Training (inaudible) he is a graduate of the University of Idaho (inaudible). Brad has a degree initially in (inaudible) went back to school and got his degree in engineering. (Inaudible) started last Friday (inaudible) with us and I think he is going to be a great asset to us. I am looking forward to a good working relationship (inaudible). Again I want to reiterate my thanks to you all for your support in helping me to hire an Assistant Engineer. Councilman Morrow was (inaudible) accept the offer and I am glad he did. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Smith: Excuse me Mr. Mayor and Council members, Janice handed me a note tonight concerning water billing. I believe that you have that item, (inaudible) carry the torch for her this evening (inaudible) I got some information from her as far as (inaudible) give that you if you would like. (inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) (End of Tape) (Discussion Inaudible) Smith: (Inaudible) but on March the 6th the shut off notice (inaudible) issued and it is actually sent out for March 13th which is the Wednesday after the City Council meeting. So from the time that the water is used which is from November to December and nc payment is received the shut off day is March 13th (inaudible). Morrow: (Inaudible) this is in response to our request (inaudible) Smith: I don't know where the request started but (inaudible) items 1 thru 5 (inaudible) On number 2, (inaudible) the first one, the first notice (inaudible) On the third item we didn't • Meridian City Council February 20, 1996 Page 32 receive copies of all the notices (inaudible) Item number four (inaudible) twice. (Inaudible) (Discussion Inaudible) Motion made and seconded to adjourn. MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 11:30 P.M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: -•IERT D CORRI.uO. ATTEST: l %A I w/ffi. i 0 MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 6,1996: a-frvve- MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 12,1996: _2W — h?Aq 1. TABLED NOVEMBER 8,1995: VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY BRIGHTON CORPORATION: tae wig /xin CA- /'? / 2. TABLED NOVEMBER 8,1995: ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR HIGHLANDS RANCH SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK COMPANY: —1 cz.6 e- `2 A,-� /�'zl / Aw, 3. TABLED FEBRUARY 6,1996: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH: 74.6,6u mo -z' -A- 5-6�1 . 4. TABLED FEBRUARY 6,1996: FINAL PLAT FOR HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 6 BY JOHN EDDY: �2Ily ell', lq'y*th j avPrave b)lAx 5. ORDINANCE #724 -BILL HOWELL ANNEXATION: 6. ORDINANCE #725 - JEFF LOFFER VACATION OF EASEMENT: afplprove. 7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR REZONE FROM R-4 TO L -O BY MERIDIAN FREE LIBRARY DISTRICT: apptwe '#�(1I_ wdh aporvve czzusib- - edy uftproey ivprekcre drdiharzee-, 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR DOVE MEADOWS NO. 2 SUBDIVISION BY DAVE LEADER: CBnfjy��ce �H b/G hQarihy An/i7 9. TINA SAYKO: CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS ABOUT IDAHO TRUSS: Tisa Sayk-o, Cdhry 17knoofa', ave �irrya�, GvAlf � j�Ch -fes 10. REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION ON PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR �eef'h TEN MILE SQUARE: a rave O � eih 11. COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS FOR GEMTONE CENTER: IR -.61e un.ff2 Aatc!� 3� /,y4'' 12. N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD WIDTH IMPROVEMENT AT AVEST PROPERTY: /-QuiQeJ apfic- r — deilecp? e,,z a ywo�- 13. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: C©rPrehe" b ivy /4t�`�'" L CITY OF MERIDIAy-- RECEIVED PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET FEB 2 01996 CITY OF MERIDIAN NAME PHONE NUMBER /1�1�6,�a e-��I��.l ;y 8G°;_ ��// C IRA, , __ _ _ � ..mss__ -;)g-- 71- . ... .... .. ff • %I- - - �, 14 n>' I-^_��.__^~ - kzdG� i� _. _. _ _ ���� _ �/ _ �,� _ _ _ �� �7 '. ��' � ��-�:- x ��: '.� � � 1�. MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: FEBRUARY 20 1996 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 13 REQUEST; DEPARTMENT REPORTS 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: nTWFR• All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. 0 RECEIVED FEB 2 9, 1996 OTY t Febuary 20, 1996 RE: Delinquent Accounts Notification To: Mayor and City Council From: Water & Sewer Billing Department We have called 5 surrounding cities and asked them several questions concerning their water and sewer billings. Please find attached those questions and each cities responses. 1•iR.'I %,_' We would like to send only one notice on all Past Due Accounts Sending out a second notice to our delinquent accounts is very time consuming and costly for the city. It would save a tremendous amount of time, money and working hours that could be utialized on other pending work. A notice is sent out when the bill is 60 days past due. By the time the second notice is sent, another bill has gone out. The day these accounts are shut off the bill is close to 90 days delinquent. Changes that need made for this are: (1) Notification of this change to All delinquent accounts. (2) New notices need to be printed. (3) Would like the shut off on delinquent accounts to be the day after the first Council Meeting. (4) We would have to hire some temps to help with the mail until this change is made. DELINQUENT BILLS 1) How many days past due do you send out? (30,60,90) A) Kuna - 60 days B) Payette - No set day, it's different every month, 30 days. (they change the date each month, so that the people don't play the system) C) Mt. Home - 30 days D)Marsing - 30 days E) Middleton - 15 days 2) When and how many notices do you send out? A) Kuna - They stamp it past due, 1 past due notice (150) B) Payette - 1 past due notice (200) C) Mt. Home - 1 past due notice- then 5 days after that, the water meter readers post notices (they call them doorknockers) on the doors. (approx. - 300) D) Marsing - after the 10th of the month - (appox. - 200) E) Middleton - 1 past due notice - (approx.- 300) A" j-dj-,t 2 K0 Mu S (�y p✓e 300 G'u-, P" 4 3 cin 3) Do you have a copy of your notice that you could fax us? A) Kuna - Stamp - (it says) final notice, water will be turned off on the morning of the 17th. If payment is not received, you have the right to appeal to the city council at the next scheduled city council meeting. B) Payette - they will fax us C) Mt. Home - they will fax us their notice and their door notice D) Marsing - they will fax us their notice and their door notice E) Middleton - they will fax us their notice 4) How are the delingquit accts. notified? A) Kuna - They stamp the bills on the back. B) Payette - 1 mailing of past due reminder C) Mt. Home - 1 mailing of past due reminder, then notices are posted on doors - they feel that the notices posted on the doors really work. D)Marsing - 1 mailing of past due reminder, then notices are posted on doors by the meter readers. E) Middleton - 1 mailing and the water is shut off 5 days after that. �«. 2 101 eK- 5) How many days after notification is water shut oM A) Kuna - bills go out the 29 -30th, due on the 15th, if they aren't received on the 17th, they would be shut off. (About 17 days notice) B) Payette - bill go out the last working day of the month, reminder goes out on the 19th, shut off 5 days after that. C) Mt. Home - bills go out the 15th of every month, have until the 10th to pay 20th - 21 st of that month. lvtRi�,i6�IG�n — �c^ _ week- a -T4 -e- -Foo-k koHc.a.. D) Marsing - bills go first day of the month, they are due the last day of the month, or before the next billing. Then they have approximatly 2 weeks and they are shut off on the 25th. E) Middleton - bills go out the last day of the month, they are delinquent on the 15th of that same month. Then they send out a reminder - then they have 5 days after that until their water is shut off. 6) About how many accts. are shut oft? A) Kuna - 3 or 4 B) Payette - 15-30 C) Mt. Home - 2-10 D) Marsing - 17 E) Middleton - 15 yK e.�.,- 7o What is the total dollar amount for delinquent accts.? A) Kuna - $700.00 - $800.00 B) Payette - $22.00 (each bill) or above (they don't have a average) C) Mt. Home - No limit on delinquent billing amount D) Marsing - $1,200. - Average E) Middleton - $16.35 or more 7) How many bill do you send out each billing period? A) Kuna - 1,030 B) Payette - 2,000 C) Mt. Home - 1,600 D) Marsing - 421 E) Middleton - 800 Me& d;a^ 7000 Kuna # - 922-5546 Payette # - 642-6024 Mt. Home # - 587-2104 Marsing # - 896-4122 Middleton # - 585-3133 Research done by Heidi J. Berry Mailing Amounts for 1st Notice 1/27/95- 304 = $60.80 2/24/95- 326 = $65.20 3/24/95- 314 = $62.80 4/21/95- 338 = $67.60 5/26/95- 288 = $57.60 6/26/95- 303 = $60.60 7/21/95- 319 = $63.80 8/25/95- 330 = $66.00 9/22/95- 381 = $76.20 10/27/95- 310 = $62.00 11/24/95- 385 —'$77.00 12/26/95- 355 = $71.00 1126/96- 316 = $63.20 Totals - 4,269.00 = $853.80 Over 300 mailings at .20 each = Over $60.00 7 FEB 12 '96 11:16 c o a o _ m ` A 3 016. O 0 y c m w E zr J z oDo °' Q°. Q 2 O }� w : m o► h o U N W U m m E@ c z U3 2 w Eno Z p p V W 1O $ O W m O d X z Z A m r O IL O 70 c civ O L) z z a 3: `$ U m a c p. a C d V • , .ter + W fh y W J _ = W wp0 9? Z z U � } W W ,� <s h co O z W Q J 7 Q J N w a OW OU Or M y LLQ y i cn a Ozw N } U z O �a ZO z O O h CC LLd Z wQv W W< O ac0 uw 4 a Wcr �- i- L- W " � 04 ¢ LU h�0 Q cr Q �a� a w 0 Q Q }O 3 W W. Q Q` W X cc W m r3_ J h Wr W >~3 J J Q FLij OZ uja. cc W W = 4 Q O n c CD Z U z 4r > 0 O a z N Q N Q O © .J Q O a z ~ J W fC F. MM w Q 0 O CLO 0 CWC LLO to a V s h OOo,J Q � Z ~ W =H Q e- } 0 0 d d } Q df LL F - i TOTAL P.01 208 587 2110 PAGE.01 , 1 )M City of Payet 0 L �. o r D C� . m d 0 c c s m IL I I I CITY OF PAYETTE 700 Center Avenue I Payette, Idaho 83661 � I I ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED i ACCOUNT N0. t I I I i I SHUT-OFF DATE I FEB 12 '96 10:45 PHONE p -j E Tr { 642-6024. Q PRESORTED FIRST CLASS MAIL U.S. POSTAGE ONE OUNCE PERMIT NO. 36 �O ANo ACCOUNT NO. SERVICE ADDRESS REMINDER Our records show that your weter bill is Past Due. Perhaps it was an oversight, butwith this reminderve will expectto receive yourpayment 1 no later than five (5) days after the date of th;s notice. If your payment has been made, please disregard this notice. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR TERMINATION NOTICE t PHONE p� E rT 642-6024 Q R PRESORTED FIRST CLASS MAIL U.S. POSTAGE ONE OUNCE �O PERMIT NO. 36 t AH� ACCOUNT NO. SERVICE ADDRESS It REMINDER Our records show that your water bill is Pest Due. Perhaps It was an f oversight, butvWth this reminderwe will expect to receive yourpayment 1 no later than five (5) days after the date of this notice. If your payment has been made, please disregard this notice. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR TERMINATION NOTICE ',PAIr;iHis AMWJIYT': 4 TOTAL P.02 1 208 642 1412 PAGE.02 CITY OF PAYETTE { 700 Center Avenue i Payette, Idaho 83661 j ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED o t b � ACCOUNT NO. SHUT-OFF DATE CRe ( y , t. m� RETURN THIS PORTION CL WITH PAYMENT r L �. o r D C� . m d 0 c c s m IL I I I CITY OF PAYETTE 700 Center Avenue I Payette, Idaho 83661 � I I ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED i ACCOUNT N0. t I I I i I SHUT-OFF DATE I FEB 12 '96 10:45 PHONE p -j E Tr { 642-6024. Q PRESORTED FIRST CLASS MAIL U.S. POSTAGE ONE OUNCE PERMIT NO. 36 �O ANo ACCOUNT NO. SERVICE ADDRESS REMINDER Our records show that your weter bill is Past Due. Perhaps it was an oversight, butwith this reminderve will expectto receive yourpayment 1 no later than five (5) days after the date of th;s notice. If your payment has been made, please disregard this notice. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR TERMINATION NOTICE t PHONE p� E rT 642-6024 Q R PRESORTED FIRST CLASS MAIL U.S. POSTAGE ONE OUNCE �O PERMIT NO. 36 t AH� ACCOUNT NO. SERVICE ADDRESS It REMINDER Our records show that your water bill is Pest Due. Perhaps It was an f oversight, butvWth this reminderwe will expect to receive yourpayment 1 no later than five (5) days after the date of this notice. If your payment has been made, please disregard this notice. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR TERMINATION NOTICE ',PAIr;iHis AMWJIYT': 4 TOTAL P.02 1 208 642 1412 PAGE.02 Middleton, Idaho 83844 + ADDRESS COnRECTION -� REQUESTED 1 ACCOUNT N0. l Y SNUT•OFF DATE 585•4:101 1 FInST ClASti MAIL U'loja us.;10SN(,ONG ()tJNConM1 T Nr, I ACCOUNT NO. SERVICE AODRESS REMINDER Have you overlooked paying Your utility hill! For your conveniance, utility bills may he paid after orfirr hours In the drop boxes at City Hall. II you have elroady peld, please dlsre©ard this notice. SEE Fmvme6 kIDE FOR $(jgpENSION NOTICE_ PAY THIS AMOUNT r SUSPENSION NOTICE This statement shows Your Water bill is past due and is subject to be discontinued. + or before the 20th of this month, a amount j pp pI not paid on will be added and services will be suspended no t lowin a mquent Fee g working day, tf the bill ig in nthe fol- i �- records, feel free to discuss it with the Cif lict with Mayor- An Appeals 8 your i at your request. bard meets in the City Clerk or the sent your you are dissatisfiedunc,I Cham. Peals Board Pg10 her With or without counsel to the Pre A to your turn off date: the. Ap. i �.,. A fair and impartial !e written decision from tile! hearing will and 10 Board hear your � A I hearing, the Water Department 'tidies submitted to you conclusion If the 1 1 i J '1 N F • T0.39Ud SZ:TT 96, ZT Had i CITY• OP MIDDLETON :. � PHONE �O A PIiG, son rcn P.O. eox 17Q 2 FIIIST CLASS MAIL Middleton, Idehn 83844 585.8811 U.S. ros rA(;e — ONC OkJNCr ADDRESS CORRECTION PrTIMl T NO I WATER & SE WATER QEP691MEUj_2Q11jQL. q _ NLEASE__h2L=AD__IN_ FULL. TIiEBh ARE__6 SOLU•f hLYNU _ _hX rE14 31 ONES 0{2__EXCEP_TI0_NS__T6__THESE__PLILIQTE, _ METERS ARE READ ON THE 19TH BILLING IS FROM THF.. 20TH MONTH. DUE TO INCLEMENT FEBRUARY. THE CITY DOES READING IS CHARGED OVER THE ADJUSTED POR WINTER USAGE. & 20TH OF EACH MONTH, WHICHMI'AN�; f I I F OF ONE MONTH TO 'THE 201H OV fl -IF. Ni=xT WFATHFR DURING ULCF.M0Kk- AANUARY NOT REAO ` YOUR METER. 1HP NOVV-hlfi�ft WINTER ANI) IN MARCH YOUR 011.1. (^ STAT EME.NTS _ARE_MAI LED_LAST_UAY_OF _Moly T_I I KEMINI')EF2S_ARE_MATLE�7_TWE_ 15 1`H IF NOT __E --------AID BY THE 20TH A_DELINC,AUL_"NT_F I?_UF_�7_OU_bV.[Ll.,_13,E AUDI=1l ANU_7��F_WA'T R EDrOFN ON THE 1Nc3 tlF" TI_IF_ - _ ! _--- W ER TU N _MC12N 21:� f . I I- I'I I_AI LS_ ON A_------UAYL__SUNgAY__Old HUi YQAYs___SEIfV i(;f:�;i :.illAl I__r31.: DISCONTINUf_O_THF FrOI—LQ! ING_IVgBK^DgY_"J -YOUR AC_COUN f PLUS $,1 0() MUST_k3F_PAID_AT_CI'fY_HA�L_E3EFORE WA'tEl For yotir convenience the City has Provided a night d(?ap It: bux t,q the left of the front door of City Hall.., Minimum water r6tes are $6.75 fol, the first (3) t111,ee r.� thtrsand gallons or fraction thereof and $1.0o for each additional 1 , Oc.10 gallons or fraction thereof. It is possible to run 20 gallOna.per minute, through a metor. For those who are considering sprinkling lawhs with city wat:r+i,, wita would like to advise you of an estimated cost of 625.00 ot- pear month plus sewer. Sewer IS a flat rate of $9.60 per month making a min fmtarn hi 11 Fol, up to 3,000 gallons of water.' of I T IS THE PROPERTY OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY TO NOTIFY THE: r i -rY IMMEDIATELY IF A LEAK IS SUSPECTED. If final bill is not paid In full service, the, account will 0 within DAYS of d i� c:r�nr inrririrl be turned in for�c.ol'lectic:ri We hope this Information will tie 1p aegarding City policies in ocar water da�pantlarilarif y `j"Y rlrae�:,t ions !•- D. SWIOERT Mayor 02/12/96 11:38 FAX 208 896 4123 CITY OF MARSING :;.P•� _ .�•r:w�:i�,%=.:i�iviv.lir�a:+.SG�•.C'.la���i.' !e tP'�v' ��% ��r+` �l:e.,9 •� s`�` ^��10. :�". 07. M CD CD .. �!.: �IW:.::+p'�•:f:S:'^.••a.V. '�'-•ro�:b`�_•.`l ....t:' �"' •1�}' 12•' V,i }` •.':l';. .: �; .�s.,a� '•�` V:>.• �jy-iT^•.C'�. i• yJ••,:.. `,��`�tiw l,+�.: Jp�%,1�;��. %�ii�,a��i�•i :_'.." '��� , •.\. �\.', Wil•• Jl• r -•, n •'��' Vic. jog — rp Co ID 00 0 m' y � CL M`D jq co =CL CD cr 33 I H p C p = D aco ) -0 �`°A°�mm�dh. I 3h T '� vm+7Co m y W. Z SSC ,� m QS O C!! ! C. -iZ. rn O °n O1 Z N p -Ci p o 0. en, W 3 CL en i------vA CD — --- C 7 -moi ty �' y 3 vA Q �. 0 I ------- rq� to 4m a o fLIP » co � o -�. � n 0 o � vi m . I —moo = z � O o'er m c)- =M. .�C'= o z up r- oacLc L7- o eo _. -, 7 .t e 00 m -- m CL CD n o da co D i N a c ° mil m0i"rA gmvo�z. a� �o0r[D ? D o o On> m�m v, 0 0 C1 G G 1.. - i r, .. •• - .. .... �. �.�� r...l�� ... ....•a•:�a moi.•.,'.. ,. .. •. .. FRE 12 196 11:40 208 896 4123 PAGE.~02�f • O YOURf'W DUE. ORDIN P.M� 41 0 CAL17 ,.HOURS'- 5-133 ! 0 5-133 5-133: REGARDING DELINQUENCY: The City Clerk shall furnish each property owner on the first of each month a statement of the amount due for water for the preceding month or up to the time that the meter has been read and for other charges relating to the water system; and if any owner neglects to pay his water bill by the tenth day of the month, or shall fail or refuse to pay the water bill in that time period, the water user's account shall be delinquent. Owners shall be notified by regular mail of this delinquency and if the bill is not paid in full within ten (10) days after service of this notification on the owner, the right to water shall cease and terminate unless the owner requests a pre -termination hearing. Should the owner not request a pre -termination hearing or if an adverse decision is rendered against the owner as a result of the pre -termination hearing, the City may require tie owner to pay the delinquent water bill attributable to the use, plus a ten dollar ($10.00) turn -on charge as a condition of receiving water service again, and in the event the water meter must be removed, an additional twenty five dollar ($25.00) fee must be paid as a condition of receiving water service again. Any owner not using water after the first of the month, or in case a meter is used after the meter has been read, must report the same to the City Clerk and have the water shut off, and if he fails to do so, the full amount for said month must be paid. No allowance will be made for nonuse for less than one month. All corrections as to the charge and al abatements shall be made under the direction of the Mayor and Council and shall be certified by the City Clerk, and all water bills must be paid by the owner of the property upon which the same is used and not by the tenants thereof. The City, in its delinquency notice to all owners, shall inform in writing all owners of their right to a pre -termination hearing, with such hearing to be held with the due process protection described below; the City will not discontinue water service to any owner's property prior to a fair and impartial hearing, after timely and adequate notice and an opportunity to confront witnesses, to personalty appear with retained counsel to be judged on facts adduced at the hearing and to otherwise be heard and defend the claim made by the City, if a pre -termination hearing is requested by any owner. The City Council shall have the responsibility of holding pre -termination hearings. The City Council shall make a record of any pre -termination hearing. The City Council shall render its decision in writing, giving the reasons for its determination. In decisions adverse to the owner, the City Council will inform the water consumer of the right to appeal the decision pursuant to the Idaho State Administrative Procedures Act. Provided, however, the City shall not initially deny or discontinue water service to any owner because of any delinquent water bill on that premises that is attributable to the prior owner. However, any and all unpaid water charges shall be a lien against the property as provided below. The City may initially deny water service to any owner who requests service at a new location when that owner has a delinquency at any previous location or premises. Provided, further, that the City shall not initially deny water service to any owner for whatever reason without informing the owner of the right to a hearing before the City Council on the issue of whether the City, can initially deny water services. In the case of an initial denial of water service, the City is not required to provide water service pending a hearing. However, a hearing upon request of an owner initially denied water service shall be held as expeditiously as possible and held in the manner and accordance with the procedures for pre -termination hearings delinqated above. All delinquent charges or fees, as provided by this Section not paid after the final determination of the delinquent account, shall be imposed as a lien against 687 f 5-133 5-136 and upon the property or premises against which such charge or fee is levied or assessed; and the Clerk shall, at the time of certifying the City taxes, certify such delinquencies together with all penalties to the Tax Collector of Ada County, and when so certified, the same shall be a lien upon the property. All monies collected by the Clerk under the provisions of this Section shall be paid over to the City Treasurer in the same manner as is required for the payment of other City monies. 5-134: AUTHORITY TO AMEND REGULATIONS: Nothing herein contained shall prohibit the Mayor and Council from amending, altering, or adding to the provisions of this Chapter in relation to the water supply or the rules of same which may be adopted in conformity therewith. Provided that no alteration in water rates shall apply to any charge upon, or contract, made with an owner under this Chapter until after the expiration of the time for which such charge was made or contract entered into. Hereafter when, and/or if, the Mayor and City Council deem it advisable to alter the water or installation rates or charges as in this Chapter recorded, such changes shall be made by resolution. 5-135: WATER FUND: All fees and charges received and collected under the authority of this Chapter shall be deposited and credited to a fund to be designated as the Water Fund. The accounts of said Fund shall show all receipts and expenditures for the maintenance, operation, upkeep and repair of the domestic water system and any payments into a sinking fund established for the purpose of paying principal of and interest on the water indebtedness of the City which shall from time to time be outstanding. As provided by law, when budgeted and appropriated, the funds and credits to the account of the Water Fund shall be available for the payment of the requirements for the maintenance operation, repairs and upkeep of the domestic water system of the City, and to the extent legally available, for payment into a sinking fund established for the payment of the principal and interest on any water bond indebtedness of the City which shall from time to time be outstanding. (Ord. 476, 4-21-87) 5-136: UNAVAILABILITY OF MUNICIPAL WATER SYSTEM; PRIVATE WATER SYSTEMS: Where the municipal water system is not available under the provisions of this Ordinance, a private water system may be installed provided that the system complies with all the provisions of this Chapter. (A) Before commencement of construction of a private water system, the owner shall first obtain written permit from the City. The application for said permit shall be made on a form furnished by the City, which the applicant shall supplement by plans, specifications and other information as may be deemed necessary by the City. A permit and inspection fee of fifty dollars ($50.00) shall be paid to the City at the time the application is filed. (B) A permit for a private water system shall not permit the use of the system until the installation is completed to the satisfaction of the City. The City shall be allowed to inspect the work at any stage of construction and, the 687 ORDINANCE NO. 725 C AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 20 FOOT UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT, BY REDUCING THE WIDTH FROM 20 FEET TO 15 FEET, WHICH EASEMENT IS THE NORTHERLY 20 FEET OF LOT 6, BLOCK 1, OF CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 1 (A RECORDED SUBDIVISION ON FILE IN BOOK 57 OF PLATS AT PAGES 5332 AND 5333, RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY, IDAHO); AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of said City to vacate a portion of the utility and drainage easement on Lot 6, Block 1, Central Valley Corporate Park No. 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO: Section 1: That pursuant to Section 50-1306A and Section 11-9-611A, specifically, and Title 50, Chapter 13, Idaho Code, generally, the City of Meridian, having held the required hearing and it appearing that proper notice of said hearing was given and there being no objection, hereby vacates the southern five feet (51) of the twenty -foot (201) wide utility and drainage easement located in the Northerly 20 feet of Lot 6, Block 1, of Central Valley Corporate Park No. 1 (a recorded Subdivision on file in Book 57 of Plats at Pages 5332 and 5333, records of Ada County, Idaho); this to leave a fifteen -foot (15' ) easement along the north line of Lot 6, Block 1. Section 2: WHEREAS, there is an emergency therefor, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage, approval and publication as required by law. PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Ada County, ;;a this 20+� day of February, 1996. T D. CORRIE, MAYOR ATTEST: L IA WILLIAM G. BERG, ., CITY CLERK, M1 S >, FEFel ORDINANCE VACATING EASEMENT/LOFFER T0. STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 20 FOOT UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT, BY REDUCING THE WIDTH FROM 20 FEET TO 15 FEET, WHICH EASEMENT IS THE NORTHERLY 20 FEET OF LOT 6, BLOCK 1, OF CENTRAL VALLEY CORPORATE PARK NO. 1 (A RECORDED SUBDIVISION ON FILE IN BOOK 57 OF PLATS AT PAGES 5332 AND 5333, RECORDS OF ADA COUNTY, IDAHO); AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE." passed as Ordinance No. 725 , by the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the ZO D-day of February, 1996, as the same appears in my office. DATED this 2", -qday of February, 1996. WILLIAM G. BERG, CITY CLERK, CITY OF MERIDIAN STATE OF IDAHO,%,,'`,�� County of Ada, ) On this �20 day of February, 1996, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. E SEAL TAp,� s !!!!l11111111 ORDINANCE VACATING EASEMENT/LOFFER fiT03T y PUBLIC PeR''IDAHO RES ING AT MERIDIAN, ID HO MY OMMISSION EXPIRES 9y Page .2 1 0 ORDINANCE NO. 724 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of said City to annex to the said City real property which is described in Section 1 below: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho: Section 1. That the real property described as: A tract of land situated in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 17, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap monumenting the Southeast Corner of said Section 17; thence along the southerly line of said Section 17, said southerly line being the centerline of Overland Road South 89°46122" West a distance of 2656.94 feet to a found 5/8" pin monumenting the South 1/4 corner of said Section 17; thence continuing along the southerly line of said Section 17 North 89°52 ,19" West a distance of 100.60 feet to a found steel pin, said pin being the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence North 00°24158" East a distance of 500.60 feet to a found steel pin, Thence North 55°16102" West a distance of 100.08 feet to a found steel pin, Thence North 24022102" West a distance of 337.77 feet to a found steel pin, Thence North 15°12102" West a distance of 179.69 feet to a point, Thence North 25027102" West a distance of 359.04 feet to a point on the Northerly right-of-way of Interstate 84, ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - HOWELL Page 1 Thence following the said right-of-way of Interstate 84 Southwesterly 801.79 feet along the arc of a circular curve to the right said curve having a central angle of 04°52101", a radius of 9439.30 feet, a chord bearing of South 84°26'34" West, and a chord distance of 801.55 feet to a point on the westerly line of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of said Section 17, Thence leaving said northerly right-of-way and following said westerly line South 00028100" West a distance of 1282.56 feet to a found steel pin monumenting the Southwest Corner of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4, Thence along the southerly line of said Section 17 and said centerline of Overland Road South 89°52119" East a distance of 1227.61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and shall be zoned C -G General Retail and Service Commercial; that the annexation and zoning is subject to the conditions referenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as adopted by the Meridian Council on the request for annexation and zoning; that all ditches, canals and waterways shall be tiled, including those that are property boundaries or only partially located on the property. Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de - annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements: a. That the Applicant will be required to connect to Meridian water and sewer at Applicant's cost and resolve how the water and sewer mains will serve the land. b. That the development of the property shall be subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development Ordinance and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. C. That, as a condition of annexation, the Applicant shall be required to enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address inclusion the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G 1., H, K, L, and M and 11- 9-606 pertaining to bicycle pathways, storm drainage, sidewalks and pedestrian walkways, greenbelt, and pressurized irrigation, of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian and other matters; that the property may be de -annexed if the terms and ANNE7CATION ORDINANCE - HOWELL Page 2 0 conditions of the Development Agreement are not satisfied. d. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to development time schedules and requirements, 11-9-605 M. which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways, and 11-9-606 B 14. which pertains to pressurized irrigation. e. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the Applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns. f. Meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full, and in particular each and every condition and/or requirement stated in paragraph M. of the conclusions of Law stated therein, and meet the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. g. Meet the representations that were made by the Applicant and those of his representatives, which include but are not limited to the following: a. Those made by David H. Roylance in his letter dated December 13, 1995. b. Those made in the Supplemental Information for Annexation, Zoning and Conditional Use Permit. C. Those made at the public hearings and on plats, and other documents, submitted to the City. d. Those made as to the hours of operation on page 2 of the Supplemental Information document. e. That there would be no underground storage tanks, no paint or body shop, no bulk oil storage, and no fuel sales on site. Section 3. That the City Clerk shall cause one ( 1) copy of the legal description, and map, which shall plainly and clearly designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of this Ordinance. Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: There being an emergency, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval as required by law. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - HOWELL Page 3 0 PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this 'Z day of February, 1996. APPROVED: Y R -- ROBERT D. CORRIE ATTEST: WILLIAM G. BERG,J -A-LCI-TY CLERK STATE OF IDAHO,) : ss. County of Ada, ) INIIII IIIIII rit'll OF SEAL - 9 •�J ` 'lrrrrrroo rrr�Nti�� I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE."; passed as Ordinance No. 724 , by the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the 207'1- day of February, 1996, as the same appears in my office. DATED this 20�1—A day of February, 1996. \�\���,rrnrrrrrrrlll SEAL - NO') cou lllrrrrrn a�ut����� City Clerk, City o Meridian Ada County, Idaho ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - HOWELL Page 4 • STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) 0 On this � day of February, 1996, before me, the undersigned, a Ifotary Public in and for said State, personally appeared WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. known to to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. .� �. L• •. SEAL OT.4 to C, If of Ary Ary Public for Idaho iding at Meridian ,Idah Commission Expires 96015��5 Ana f n 96 FEB 2z /S00 FEE - --- - TO ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - HOWELL Page 5 • u VI I HEIGHTS TF t,{ 30 i 1\ I 9 10 11 12 IJP I20 \ 2 ----- ------ ------14- 1 I ii I I 1 I 1 1 1 � 2 i 1 11 9 SUBDI ISION I I 1 I � I I I 1 11 I I I I s 3 22 I 1 - I9 \ 1 1 1 \ 1 I ' '" HEIGHTS ' � - 1 NO. 2 i / ,o i� S BDIVI ION _ - ----------------------------------- ---- --- --------------------------------------------- "�] ,,42vf NM CE NO. 1?4 fb1U.. NOWEI.L y - ------------------- -------------- ------------------ -----' CPA& 6n Z CD N. 15° 12` o'ZNw• 174.69 w ------------------- :4/ s. V4 cOF 4w-. 11, T ? O*kL ►-OI NT c