HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 02-06MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1996 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JANUARY 16,1996:
(APPROVED)
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JANUARY 23,1996:
(APPROVED)
PROCLAMATION: BURN AWARENESS WEEK:
2. PROCLAMATION: ENGINEER'S WEEK:
3. APA: TREASURE VALLEY ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS:
4. ACHD: WIDTH IMPROVEMENT OF N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD AT FRED
MEYERS:
5. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR
FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT, LOUNGE, AND MICRO -BREWERY BY
SANDPIPER RESTAURANTS: (APPROVED FINDINGS; APPROVED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT)
6. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST
FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
(APPROVED)
7. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: ORDINANCE #718 - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3
SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION: (APPROVED)
8. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUED.
BY MARTY GOLDSMITH: (APPROVED)
9. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SALMON
RAPIDS NO.3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH: (TABLED
UNTIL FEBRUARY 20, 1996)
10. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 5 BY INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT:
(APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS)
11. ORDINANCE #721 - ELLIOTT INDUSTRIAL CO. ANNEXATION: (APPROVED)
12. ORDINANCE #722 - HAVEN COVE NO. 6 SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION:
(APPROVED)
13. ORDINANCE #723 - DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FOR PARKS:
(SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR FEBRUARY 27, 1996 AT 6:00 P.M.)
14. FINAL PLAT: HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 6,5 LOTS, BY JOHN EDDY:
(TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 20, 1996)
15. FINAL PLAT: GEMTONE BUSINESS CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1, 1 LOT BY
GEMTONE INC.: (APPROVED)
16. BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR PAISANO'S ITALIAN RESTAURANT:
(APPROVED)
17. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION FOR FILING OF THE FINAL PLAT FOR
HARTFORD SUBDIVISION: (APPROVED FOR ONE YEAR)
18. WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: (APPROVED)
19. APPROVE BILLS: (TABLED UNTIL FEBRUARY 12, 1996 SPECIAL MEETING)
20. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
A. WAYNE CROOKSTON, CITY ATTORNEY:
1. BILL HOWELL ANNEXATION: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN
ORDINANCE FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING)
B. WILLIAM BERG, JR., CITY CLERK:
1. JEFF LOFFER VACATION OF EASEMENT: (CITY ATTORNEY TO
PREPARE AN ORDINANCE)
C. SHARI STILES, P & Z ADMINISTRATOR:
1. PRESENTATION BY JOHN MCCREEDY AND STEVE BRADBURY
CONCERNING RECONSIDERATION OF BILL HOWELL PROJECT:
21. EXECUTIVE SESSION: (APPROVE TERMINATION; DENY APPEAL)
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL FEBRUARY 6, 1996
The regular meeting of the Meridian City Council was called to order by Mayor Robert D.
Corrie at 7:30 P.M.:
MEMBERS PRESENT: Walt Morrow, Glenn Bentley, Charles Rountree, Ron Tolsma:
OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Arden Davis,
Marty Goldsmith, Bill Howell, Larry sale, Ery Olen, Landon Exley, Dave Collins, Glen
Blaser, Pat Dolby, John McCreedy, Steve Bradbury:
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JANUARY 16,1996:
Corrie: Council, any correction or alterations?
Tolsma: Mr. Mayor, I move they be approved as written.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Tolsma, second by Mr. Rountree that the minutes of the
previous meeting held January 16, be approved, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JANUARY 23,1996:
Corrie: What is your pleasure?
Tolsma: Mayor I move they be approved as written.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Tolsma, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the minutes of
the Special Meeting held January 23, 1996 be approved, all those in favor say aye?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #1: PROCLAMATION: BURN AWARENESS WEEK:
Corrie: We have with us this evening to accept this proclamation Gary W. West who is the
Potentate of the EI Korah, Mr. Mary Crosser and John Mosgrave which is the head of the
temple here in Meridian. The proclamation WHEREAS, severe burn injuries are a leading
cause of deaths and injuries in North America, especially among young children;
WHEREAS, every year more than 2 million people suffer burn injuries of some kind, and
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 2
more than one of every three burn victims are children; WHEREAS, approximately 75
percent of all burn injuries and deaths are preventable; WHEREAS, the Shrine of North
America operates three Shriners Burns Institutes, which provide free medical care to
severely burned children; WHEREAS, the Shrine of North America and the Shriners Burns
Institutes join with other bum facilities across the nation in recognizing the seriousness of
this hazard and the urgent need to educate the public about burn prevention and fire
safety; WHEREAS, it is fitting and appropriate to acknowledge the contributions of the
Shrine of North America and to commend the Shriners for their continued support and care
for young burn victims; NOW, THEREFORE, 1, Robert D. Corrie, Mayor of Meridian, do
hereby proclaim the week of February 4 - 10, 1996 as BURN AWARENESS WEEK in
Meridian and do encourage all of our citizens to support the Shriners Burns Institutes and
to take appropriate precautions to protect their families from devastating burn injuries. In
Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and have affixed the Official Seal of
Meridian on this 6th day of February, 1996.
ITEM #2: PROCLAMATION: ENGINEERS WEEK:
Corrie: We have another proclamation here and I am glad to have Arden Davis tonight.
WHEREAS, Engineer's Week is sponsored by the Idaho Chapter of The American Society
of Heating Refrigerating and Air -Conditioning Engineers, the various chapters of the Idaho
Society of Professional Engineers, and National Society of Professional Engineers; and
WHEREAS, during this week the Idaho Chapter of ASHRAE will conduct special programs
in our schools, emphasizing engineering education and careers; and WHEREAS, the
Engineer's Week activities bring to the public's attention the importance of the engineer's
role in the technological growth of our nation; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate to pay
tribute to Idaho's and the nation's engineers for their contributions toward developing and
implementing scientific and technical advances, as well as their leadership in establishing
a high standard of moral and ethical conduct; and WHEREAS, we can be proud of the
contributions engineers have made toward the development of industry, agriculture,
communications, construction, medicine, high technology, and higher education and to the
key role engineering has played in these and other aspects of or society; NOW,
THEREFORE, 1, Robert D. Corrie, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do here by Proclaim the
Week of February 18 through February 24, 1996 as ENGINEER'S WEEK in Meridian and
all the surrounding lands, and I urge all to recognize the contributions made by this
dedicated group of specially -trained citizens and commend and support them for their
efforts to make our great city, our great state and our nation a better place to live. DATED
this 6th day of February, 1996.
Davis: I would like to add, we are going to be giving away a $500 scholarship this Spring
for a student graduating from one of the Treasure Valley Schools who will be attending one
of the universities here in Idaho and they need to get an engineering career. So if any of
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 3
your children happen to be seniors this year and want to get into the race contact the
counselors here at Meridian and Eagle High or whatever they might be. Thank you I
appreciate your support.
Corrie: I have one other, I would like to recognize Celeste C. Vialet has completed a
program in operation of the Waste Water Treatment Plats (inaudible) continuing education
units in January of 1996, so congratulations to Celeste.
ITEM #3: APA: TREASURE VALLEY ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS:
Corrie: Ery
Olen: Thank you Mr. Mayor and members of the Council. I know you have a full agenda
so I am going to keep my comments brief. Tonight I would like to bring you up to date on
the status of where we are with a study that looks at long range transportation needs in the
Treasure Valley being Canyon and Ada County. This study, this effort was actually and
initiated roughly April (inaudible) Treasure Valley Mayors got together for the kick off of
the effort. It included (inaudible) was the Mayors of Nampa and Caldwell (inaudible)
cybertran which promised a light rail (inaudible) type system in the future. I might add too
that during that (inaudible) the City of Meridian was represented by Councilman Tolsma
and I believe then Councilman Corrie. (Inaudible) representatives from both sides
(inaudible) to get involved in this effort (inaudible). I might add I have been involved in
transportation planning in Ada County for the last 20 years. This was the first time to my
knowledge that (inaudible) to the west on mutual transportation needs. We started the
process off with a pretty good emphasis on public involvement. (Inaudible) these are some
of the issues that came out of that effort. This is what the public and key elected officials
told us on the onset. A couple of things you will see throughout this is (inaudible) of future
corridors and options was a theme we heard a great deal about from the public. We heard
a lot of folks talk about the need to consider alternatives to driving. Basically the feed back
was (inaudible) we really have to provide (inaudible) Surprisingly the public had a good
perception of the need to improve that and coordinating action between the Treasure
Valley governments. Other comments that came out of that initial public out reach, issues
(inaudible) there was quite an emphasis (inaudible) on making sure we are realistic about
what things cost and how we are going to pay for them. Our consulting team which we
used throughout this process developed seven basic alternatives (inaudible). I would like
to summarize briefly what the (inaudible) the first two deal with basically short term
solutions. Obviously we always look at continued (inaudible) and they also identify that
(inaudible) let's get more out of what we have that we can. (Inaudible) they then looked
at two levels of transit investments (inaudible) beginning to have basic urban service in the
urban communities of Treasure Valley, Boise, Meridian, Nampa and Caldwell with the
outlying cities perhaps having van pool type services those types of things. The major
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 4
(inaudible) began to look at longer term modern technology solutions to serve travel in the
Treasure Valley (inaudible) the rail corridor running east west. I know it has been in the
City of Meridian's Comprehensive Plan for a number of years and this identified the need
to do that. They also looked at some roadway type options. Moderate and major, the
moderate options basically identified connecting the arterial between the two counties
within Canyon County continuous arterials. It talks about the preservation of future
corridors and also identified improving existing routes for connection east and west. The
major roadway investment went a little further than that and identified the need for a future
south by-pass I think it is called that would be basically a by-pass of the interstate system
by-passing Boise, Meridian, Nampa and Caldwell to the south. Finally they identified the
final option here is a balance system. (Inaudible) will meet next month and basically make
their final recommendation on these alternatives. One of the other provisions in our
contract (inaudible) was to develop what we described as action plan. Steps they would
recommend we take to follow up on this Treasure Valley Analysis that we did. What I
would like to do is to go through a few slides that identify some of these specifically and
not necessarily in the order that they are shown here but more in a chronological sequence
of events. The first recommendation of our consulting team was that we need to identify
some (inaudible) to continue the good work that has been started (inaudible) mutual
transportation issues. The consultants recommending that one option would be to continue
(inaudible) the problem with that is they don't really have any formal status and the
membership tends to change over time. The second would be to rely on another
organization possibly the district office of Idaho Transportation Department because they
do have jurisdiction (inaudible). The third option is to (inaudible) there have been a lot of
(inaudible) doing away with Ada Planning Association and forming Treasure Valley
Planning Association for example. Another recommendation from the consultant was that
we need to develop some of the (inaudible) that would be necessary to look at long range
transportation issues in Treasure Valley. Currently in Ada County those tools are available
to the (inaudible) what I call the million dollar investment database that we monitor and
maintain and have for a good number of years. Basically what our consultant are
recommending (inaudible) that a similar level of effort be made in Ada County. They
identified to options to do that and one would be to develop a new travel forecast
(inaudible) the second would be to adapt our existing one. Many of the long range
options that were looked at do require a fairly sophisticated analysis and would (inaudible).
One of the issues in the action steps (inaudible) that the Canyon County folk have really
taken an interest in and identified some value from is beginning to look at arterial
connections. (Inaudible) both east -west and north -south, the consultant suggested we
start with alternative 4-A. This would allow more reliable future roadway pattern, assure
continuity in the system. Once we identify what those future arterials is going to be it would
be better capable of preserving the capacity and protecting the corridors for those
arterials. The folks in Canyon County are now requesting and are actually going to be
holding a (inaudible) of all the elected officials on the 21 st of this month for the purpose
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 5
of looking at these arterial connection issues and see where they have consensus. I think
it is something that we in Ada County have done routinely but that really hasn't been done
to the same level in Canyon County. A lot of immediate benefit from that is seen from our
neighbors to the west. The next action item and kind of the central theme to this whole
(inaudible) our consultant has recommended that we try and reach some general
agreement of what the role (inaudible) because a general consensus that needs to be
more generally available in Treasure Valley there is currently no consensus on that
(inaudible) on how that might be financed. They suggest we start with a moderate transit
as a starting point and that agreement in principle the two types of agreement to be
considered one would be connection between communities. The second a general
purpose of (inaudible) in Ada County we have adapted this concept in the initial draft and
looked at what it might cost to provide that kind of service. Basically it would be (inaudible)
the City of Boise and Meridian and also Nampa, Caldwell with perhaps express service
outside those urban areas and the use of ride sharing and van pools. Our estimates are
right now that kind of a system in 20 years will cost roughly 23 million dollars a year. In
order to pay for that (inaudible) with less than half a percent, four tenths of a percent of a
future sales tax is one way. Another would be roughly four tenths of a percent of future
employee tax. That is kind of what is currently be considered by the APA Board because
of our 20 15 planning process. Our consultant also suggested that we grow into transit
and we not jump right into a major urban type system or a new technology but rather that
we perhaps start small and grow into it. By that they mean maybe start with the van pools
in some of the outlying cities. Major commute between Canyon and Ada County I think a
lot of that is already happening. Our van pool program for example has really increased
almost double over the last few years. They now have I think 25 vans, they started with
13 just 3 years ago. They are talking about having some peak service linking major
destinations. The example here is really from Caldwell to Micron but there is a lot of
emerging employment centers also in Canyon County and that reverse could also be dealt
with. Then they suggest (inaudible) looking at some of the other fixed route services and
those kinds of things. At the request of the (inaudible) survey of some of the other cities
in the Pacific northwest that are generally identified as having good cooperative planning
efforts and also good transit systems. Those cities, Spokane, Reno, Salt Lake, Portland
and Denver. In the case of Spokane and Reno they are about the same size as Treasure
Valley right now and what we are projected to grow to. What we have got from those cities
are that they do have regional transit, they also have regional cooperation generally inter
county cooperation and they do a good job of integrating (inaudible). They also don't' rely
on any single (inaudible) perhaps the key to all of this they are generally successful with
their public transportation. They also have dedicated funds available for those. I would like
to maybe expand on that just a little bit. I know there is a lot of information on this and
what I would like to do is highlight. We are showing the (inaudible) comparing them to
Boise and to the Treasure Valley area. When you look at the dedicated funding sources
available you can see they are fairly significant in this column for each of those entities.
• 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 6
With the exception of Portland they all have a sales tax they range from about a 1/4% to
about six tenths of a percent. Portland actually has a payroll tax, the State of Oregon does
not have any sales tax and their rate is about .6%. You can see that the level of dedicated
(inaudible) range from 60% up to over 80%. You can also see that Boise and Treasure
Valley have neither of those (inaudible). I think if we are going to be successful at all in
looking at expanding public transit we are going to have to deal with that issue of
(inaudible). Finally our consultant was asked to look at longer (inaudible) as part of their
report to us. They are recommending that we consider the funding sources shown here.
The first two are federal funds. Frankly the federal funds are (inaudible) balanced budget
provisions and we are also seeing a roll back in federal assistance for supporting public
transportation. The sales tax and payroll tax are the two of the most common methods that
communities used as a dedicated source for funding transit. We recently completed a
survey of 600 random households. We got a 70% and some return which is phenomenal
and when they were asked if we were going to raise revenue for public transit which
sources would you prefer. The majority of them identified sales tax. It was interesting to
note that those over 60 in that sample did prefer, showed a strong preference for
(inaudible). That completes the results of the study (inaudible) as it stands right now. The
next step in completing our process is to have (inaudible) in Canyon County to see where
(inaudible) the APA board at the end of this month February 26 is going to be asked to
adopt (inaudible) that incorporates many of these concepts. The (inaudible) will be getting
back together in the next few weeks as well to make their final recommendation.
Depending on that action I think we will be bringing back to you and the other governments
formal recommendations for some action on your part. This has been very successful effort
because it has brought together the representatives from both sides of the County line to
begin dealing with regional issues like transportation. Thus far it has been a very
satisfactory kind of a process. I am here tonight if you have any comments about what we
have done or questions, and to let you know where we are with it and where the process
is going.
Corrie: Ery thank you, any comments from Council or questions? Thank you Erv, I
appreciate your presentation. I think that transportation is going to be an important point
that we are going to have to take up and are taking up now. Thank you for your
presentation.
ITEM #4: ACHD: WIDTH IMPROVEMENT OF N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD AT FRED
MEYERS:
Corrie: Larry Sale, would you
Sale: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council, for the record my name is Larry Sale, I am with
Ada County Highway District. I keep looking over at the counselor to see if he is going to
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 7
swear me in tonight. Mr. Mayor I am not quite sure what you expect, I will start out with
some history and if you have any questions why jump in at any time. If you think that will
shorten my speech. When Fred Meyers was approved the Highway District received a
request and got a traffic impact study for the project and determined from that study that
in order for the facility or in order for the street system to accommodate the traffic that the
traffic and turning movements that are going to be generated by the complex that we
needed to widen Locust Grove Road to provide additional lanes and additional turning
capacity on that street to handle the facility. So we made that requirement and went
forward. As we then retained Quadrant Engineering to design that street widening project
for us and the preliminary stages of that design set the street sections that were
appropriate to handle everything it needed to. We selected those from more than one
standpoint obviously. We wanted something that would handle all of the traffic movement,
the volume as well as turning movements. We wanted something that would be
expandable in the future because we are only dealing with the east side of Locust Grove
Road, we wanted that to be something that would be permanent and we wanted something
that obviously was going to cost, we didn't want it to cost any more than it had to.
Quadrant proceeded with design, Fred Meyers came back and said look at the same time
we also required the developer to improve certain portions of Fairview frontage, put in
some acceleration and decerlation lanes at each of their three driveways. The developer
was required to put in the sidewalk on both frontages. To refresh some of your memories
under our impact fee program we are not allowed any more to require the developer to
improve the frontage of arterials or collectors unless we pay them for it. Fred Meyer
representatives came back and said look we are spending money on Fairview why don't
we team up and instead of just patching on Fairview Avenue for these accelerations,
decelerations lanes, the Highway District had some more money to the pot and we put in
curb and gutter and get the full ultimate improvements on Fairview on the north side as
well as Locust Grove. The Highway District considered that and decided that was an
appropriate thing to do. So we proceeded with the design of the facility so that we are now
improving or we are intending to improve a quarter mile of Fairview on the north side and
a 1/4 mile, I guess it is just short of a 1/4 mile on the east side of Locust Grove Road. A
few weeks ago, we found out that apparently was at odds with what the City wanted or
what the City had required of the developer. Two weeks ago we came over and met with
Councilman Morrow, Mr. Smith and Ms. Stiles and Councilman Bentley was there and we
discussed how we got where we were and where we thought we had to go from here. The
section that we are constructing (inaudible) between Fairview and Ustick from Eagle Road
to Meridian Road (inaudible). Locust Grove is in the middle. This shows the development
that has occurred, everything has been approved and recorded. (Inaudible) that don't
shown on there (inaudible). The blue colors indicated the approximate location of
driveways which enter Locust Grove Road, driveways and street intersections. (Inaudible)
as you are aware Locust Grove Road through this stretch has been fully improved to
(inaudible) that street section is (inaudible). So we decided there that we obviously had
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 8
to take care of the most busy portion of the street which was obviously the commercial
complex on the east side. (Inaudible) on the west side. So examining all of that we
determined that the best use of public money was to retain the improvements through this
stretch of Locust Grove Road with the foreseeable future and extend a (inaudible) five
lanes up to about this point. (Inaudible) of the Avest complex, Fred Meyer store and said
(inaudible) so it allows stacking for left turns. (Inaudible) north of that point there are 1.
2, 3, 4 driveways in the next (inaudible) of road. (Inaudible) We recognize that some point
we will have to come back and put in (inaudible) at least (inaudible) collector (inaudible)
That is something we will have to do in the future anyway. It was their determination that
the most efficient economical use of the funds that we have was to build a street section
which was capable of five lanes to a point 150 feet north of the ring road and then taper
back into a four lane section and anticipate a long term of retention of four lane section in
that portion of Locust Grove Road. There was one other concern that we had, one other
criteria that we had in selecting the section and that was if you remember the public
hearings that were held here there was a lot of concern on the part of the neighbors on the
west side as to the eventual taking of their front yards and constructing a roadway in there
that would be right up close to their front doors. When we looked at the maps, the aerial
photographs that showed those properties and particularly the location of some houses
we were probably more concerned than they were because it looked like if we kept the
street location where it was and with the full five lane section all the way north we would
probably have to buy out a few houses. So one when we are settling the preliminary
design we move the centerline of the travel part of the street, the travel way portion being
that part between the curbs, a few feet east, and pulled the street away from the single
family residences on the west side so that we are now able with this projected construction
we are now able to with the right of way that we will eventually buy we will still have they
will still have more than a 20 foot setback from the front of their dwellings to the their
property line. Which is I think it is your minimum front yard setback, I could be incorrect
on that. The design is complete, has been submitted to the district for review. We have a
review conference scheduled this week I believe. We anticipate going to construction,
going to bid shortly. We would expect to construct that and have it completed prior to the
opening of a Fred Meyer store later this year. In the future the approval of Locust Grove
road is still included in the five year work program at this time. In the future we will come
back and construct this design that we are doing now is the design of both the east and
west sides of Locust Grove. In the future we can come back and advertise a separate
contract for the west half of the road that will tie into this one and finally have a finished
product. Any questions?
Corrie: Council?
Morrow. What is the, in the future the design for the west side of the road, would you
define that better for me please? What does that mean?
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 9
Sale: Define the design or define future?
Morrow. Well, both.
•
Sale: The design is set with this design, we know what the elevation of the curbs and
sidewalks will be and what their location will be. The future will be determined by the need
as we see it as traffic picks up on Locust Grove Road and needs that additional lane. We
can now stripe what we are building now can be striped for four lanes so that what we will
add in the future is a fifth lane south bound would be the outside lane south bound from
about the blue line there down to Fairview. In the process of doing this project we are also
going to pick up a problem storm drain in that area and take it down south to Fairview and
get rid of a problem in the Jackson Drain that I think we are all familiar with. Does that
answer the question Councilman Morrow?
Morrow. Well, point of clarification then, what you are indicating then in this construction
there will or will not be five lanes built between Fairview and and the cross blue lines at
the point of the area.
Sale: For this construction there will not be five lanes built. There will be four lanes to the
loop road the capability for striping four lanes and a taper back north of that into the
current, it probably can't carry four lanes all the way across back to Oakcrest. We would
add four lanes past the part of the street that has most of the traffic on it.
Morrow: So does that mean that you have four lanes coming down or the capability of
striping four lanes from the very top cross blue line down Chateau then you create a bottle
neck on the portion between Oakcrest and this property line and you can't stripe four
lanes.
Sale: There is no need to stripe four lanes yes that is correct because the traffic doesn't
need (inaudible) we can stripe four lanes up to here and handle all the traffic from these
(inaudible) that is going to occur in this area. Virtually all of the traffic is going to occur
from this point south. This traffic up here can still be handled by the two lane road.
Morrow. And the issues is then from the top of the blue line to the property line which is
required by our development agreement to be developed to a five lane standard would in
fact be developed to a shorter standard and then at some standpoint in the future move
to a five lane standard.
Sale: In the future we will have five lanes on Fairview up to this point. From their north
will be four lanes. Right now this will be continued to be striped for two lanes through down
into this point where it will (inaudible) from there down to (inaudible).
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 10
Morrow. And the undeveloped ground from the last subdivision to Ustick Road is to what
standard?
Sale: Two lanes.
Morrow. In the future?
Sale: I don't know, if you notice the number, this area is part of Meridian (inaudible) we
have protected this arterial very well from driveways. If we continue that practice on this
side we can very well live with four lanes through this entire (inaudible) with (inaudible) at
the major intersections. That will be far more economical than building a two way turn lane
for thousands of feet where there are no place to turn left to.
Morrow: Based on that map it appears to me that there is approximately eight parcels of
property that would access that road with a turn off of Locust Grove into those parcels.
Sale: There are probably seven driveways there now. There is probably one here, one
here and one here and here, I think that this is a reservation (inaudible). My sense is that
is a 60 foot strip of land that has been acquired for a street but I don't know that to be true.
Anyway eight driveways, we can live with the eight driveways scattered out as they are.
The left turns into them would be, we would figure each one, if there is a single family
house on each one we would figure one left turn into a day during the peak hours you
would say. We can live with that with a four lane street.
Morrow. But I would suggest to you that those will all be subdivisions.
Sale: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Morrow, I agree with that and I am urging us both to
make sure that we don't allow any front on housing on that street so that we don't increase
the number of driveways and perhaps even decrease a few. Meridian has a great
opportunity that your sister City to the west, east, that way didn't. We have a different
mentality now about protecting the arterials. If you remember Maple Grove Road and the
west bench looks like and five mile road and the west bench looks like when those
properties were developing we were allowing, we being the Highway District at that time
and Ada County at that time our regulations were not sophisticated I guess for lack of a
better word, sophisticated enough to require or to prohibit lots fronting on those roads. So
you drive down there today and you see a lot of lots that were plated in the seventies that
have drive ways on them. All of our regulations today are much more protective of the
arterials than we were then. Your subdivisions ordinances don't allow it, our policies don't'
allow it, so if you look in your developing area you are going to have situations just like this
where you are going to have literally thousands of feet in a mile stretch of road but there
aren't going to be any driveways on it. If you look at Cherry lane that we just finished all
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 11
of the developed land along there has only local street intersections, there are no
driveways allowed out of those new subdivisions. Obviously we have to care for and
protect the existing farm home that is there, it is going to stay there and we don't need to
fool ourselves into thinking that it is going to go away. We are going to have those
occasional driveways. On Cherry Lane we opted for a five lane section because there
were several of those along the stretch and also there were a couple of older
subdivisions that had some front on housing. What I am hoping is that as we jointly review
the development applications that you are going to have, let's continue to protect these
section line roads and avoid the construction of $100,000 or more per mile of pavement
that we really don't' need. Anyway I kind of got on my soap box there. To go back to
Councilman Morrows question obviously I can't foretell the future very well, the crystal ball
gets foggy in this weather. I would hope that as we see those applications come in we
protect very zealously the frontage and get the right of way. We will continue to get 90 feet
of right of way on every section line road in all the urban areas of the county. We will build
the road that will accommodate the traffic for at least 20 years.
Corrie: Larry do you think from your traffic studies that four lanes for the Fred Meyers on
that side is going to be enough?
Sale: Yes sir.
Corrie: For how long that is the question I guess, until we decide.
Sale: For longer than, well I won't say that, until we construct the other side of Locust
Grove Road. I would like to be optimistic and say, I will say this, with a big if, if we are able
to reconstruct or improve Locust Grove Road on that stretch from Fairview to Ustick in the
five year work program. That will occur before Fred Meyers uses up the capacity of the
four lanes.
Corrie: Mr. Morrow any further questions?
Bentley: Is there plans to stripe are we going to have room for bike lanes along that stretch
by Fred Meyers?
Sale: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Bentley, I was hoping you wouldn't ask that. The street
section up there is 52 feet and that is about the minimum we need for four lanes. We, as
with any situation where you have more than one people, we have differing opinions as
to whether or not we should stripe for bike lanes in situations like that or allow for that
outer lane to be used a mix of vehicles and bicycles. The outer lane would be fourteen feet
which is our standard outside lane that we use on streets where we don't stripe bike lanes.
Inside lanes would be 12 feet if my arithmetic is right, somebody correct me, the two inside
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 12
lanes would be 12 feet, 24 feet, the two outside lanes would be 14. We would allow that
or we would build that to allow a mix of bikes and vehicles. That is the configuration of
Cherry Lane from Linder to Ten Mile. In fact I think we only have 13 feet, maybe on the
outside lanes. We have some right of way constraint in there from the days when we only
had 80 feet of right of way on those platted subdivisions. But that would be the same kind
of space that would be available for both vehicles and bicycles. (End of Tape)
Corrie: Any further comment? Staff, comments or questions?
Smith: Mr. Mayor, Larry, I am just curious on four lane roadways when you come to an
intersection, did I understand you to say that a center turn lane could be placed as these
intersection points to facilitate that turning movement?
Sale: Mr. Mayor, we will have to go back and retrofit the Chateau intersection for example
and will probably have to buy some right of way, we will have to tear out the improvements
that are there. Widen them 6 or 7 feet on each side in order to put left turn bays on both
ends of the intersections where we want the left turn lanes.
Smith: Mr. Mayor, one other thing, for Larry's benefit, he was guessing a little bit about
development of the unimproved land north of Chateau Meadows Subdivision but basically
as I recall the plats that had been filed with us, the preliminary plats the entrances line up
with the entrances on the west side of Locust Grove Road. So, basically you have north
of the Avest parcel you have the access for Mirage Meadows, the access from Chateau
Meadows, which is a cross access, you are way too far north, come down south, start at
Avest. The first one is Mirage Meadows, the next one is Chateau Meadows, and then the
next access is the northerly part of Chateau Meadows in Tract Subdivision. North of that
is Cougar Creek which will line up with Chamberlain Estates right there. That long slender
parcel that you thought was an access that is a drainage pond for the Chamberlain Estates
Subdivision. North of that red mark that you made is an access from Pheasant Point and
that will probably line up with an access into that southeast corner of Ustick and Locust
Grove. Come down and hook into that access, right there, I am guessing. So your points
of access on Locust Grove north of Avest would be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 as I recall what has been
filed to the east side of Locust Grove. At those points then I am assuming what Larry is
telling us that there will be a widened section to facilitate a left turn lane with a certain
stacking capability, is that correct Larry?
Sale: Mr. Mayor, there may or may not be depending on the volume that those streets
would allow. As you see the streets to the west with the exception of the northern most one
are pretty short, they don't bring much traffic out to Locust Grove Road. We would look at
each of those in the design of Locust Grove, actually when we, we probably already, those
are preliminary plats Gary?
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 13
Smith: Yes
Sale: We have the right of way or will when they are platted, we will have the right of way
that will be sufficient to stuff in turn lanes if we need them. We can get the two way
(inaudible) 90 foot section, 90 foot right of way. So if those streets are going to generate
enough traffic to need the left turn we will construct that when we do Locust Grove Road.
Smith: That is all I have Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Any other staff member have any questions or concerns?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, Larry did you say that was going to be five foot sidewalk on
Locust Grove Road now?
Sale: I think it is five foot now, the portion that is constructed. I was talking about the
sidewalk up here, the existing sidewalk.
Stiles: Not what you are requiring at the Fred Meyer piece. I am just curious how all of
these changes came about because during our review and when we come up with the
development agreement this is based on your Commission's approved report. That was
how our development agreement was put in place. So I am wondering how these changes
take place and we get no input and no letter or anything, advising us of any of this.
Sale: Mr. Mayor, I don't think any changes have taken place that were of any substance.
The street section, I don't remember the specifics of our requirement. But, we require the
developer to construct his half of a five lane street. We have done that to the extent that
it is needed north of the loop road or north of a taper from the loop road, north of the loop
road.
Corrie: I guess I am getting confused now, we've asked them to (inaudible) they are getting
a four lane now is that correct?
Sale: We are paying for it, the public is paying for it. We are paying for a five lane road,
well, we are paying for their half of a five lane road from Fairview up to a point north of the
loop road then it tapers back to a four lane road.
Corrie: I guess I am kind of dumb here but if we are paying for it why aren't we getting it?
I mean we are paying for a five lane and we are getting a four lane.
Sale: No, we are paying for, first of all we are paying for improvements along Fairview, we
are paying for half of a four lane section up to, five lane section up to here and paying to
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 14
taper into the existing improvements north of Mr. Brian's property. (Inaudible).
Corrie: So if I understand this correctly (inaudible) is that we are going to have a five lane,
you are saying it is a four lane, what happens if we don't go with a four lane and stay with
a five, then what happens.
Sale: Most of it will ultimately be a five lane and I don't know what will happen.
Morrow. I think for point of Council discussion part of this is a philosophical issue. We as
a Council have approved projects and fashioned development agreements based on the
five lane concept throughout the City on our section line roads. Part of that design is to
allow four center turn lanes, two outside traffic lanes, bike lanes, and so on and so forth.
The issue here is that we approve the Fred Meyer concept with that build out of the five
lane on their side being complete to their property line. What the highway district has done
is they have said that from the blue line north that they would not require that build out to
five lane status based on their perception that it will be a number of years before that might
be required. Our position as a City has been that we want to build these things out as we
go as opposed to tearing them out at some point in the future and building them to the five
lane width. It is a kind of pay as you go policy. So there is where the conflict is at this
point is. Our development agreement says five lanes, that is what we approved. The
district is requiring only a taper to four lanes on the blue to the north of property line. And
so I guess the issue is that how do we as a City determine what we need for transportation
and development and who pays their fair share and so forth and coordinate that with the
highway district.
Sale: Mr. Mayor for explanation, we didn't know until recently that you had a development
agreement with the Developer that required five lanes. We would have been here months
ago if we understood that.
Corrie: I guess if we (inaudible) Fred Meyers doesn't get open (inaudible)
Sale: That is my understanding.
Smith: Mr. Mayor, may I ask a question of Larry. Larry, would it be possible to construct
the Avest portion of five lanes up to the entrance to Mirage Meadows and taper on the
north side of Mirage Meadows access on that east side so that portion that is being built
right now and then have a short taper section north of that on the east side which would
mean the removal of some curb and gutter and sidewalk but it would facilitate the
construction of half of the five lane section through this parcel of property that is under
construction and development.
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 15
Sale: Mr. Mayor, anything is possible if you throw enough money into it. Initially as I said
we don't plan to remove these improvements through here because (inaudible) except
here. When we take this out we will have to come back down into here so that when we
go to here to this point (inaudible). That is not something that we are eager to take on and
all those homeowners (inaudible). Particularly here in this case where it just isn't needed
yet. But yes it could be done.
Corrie: Any further comment from Council?
Sale: Mr. Mayor if you perceive any fault on our part I apologize for that. We proceeded
in what we felt was the appropriate manner both from an engineering standpoint and from
a cost effective standpoint.
Corrie: Thank you Larry.
ITEM #5: TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR
FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT, LOUNGE AND MICRO -BREWERY BY SANDPIPER
RESTAURANTS:
Corrie: Is the representative from Sandpiper here tonight?
Exley: Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council, my name is Landon Exley, I am a
representative of Sandpiper Restaurants and a partner in this particular project. We are
here tonight seeking your approval for our CUP for a full service restaurant, lounge and
micro -brewery. The location of the project of the facility is in Central Valley Corporate
Park, it is a portion of lot 1, block 6 in the C -G zone. The parcel consists of 1.06 acres or
approximately 40,000 square feet. The square footage of the restaurant is approximately
7000 square feet. It will seat approximately 228 people. We have on site parking for 63
cars which is 163% of the required plus of our own (inaudible) we are going to build 40
additional spaces on the commercial parking lot across the drive way on the east side of
the restaurant. In the Central Valley Corporate Park in this area they have a reciprocal
parking agreement anyway. So they can park on ours and we can park on theirs. As part
of our arrangement with Nahas we are going to improve 40 additional spaces. After
considerable searching we decided to have the building designed by Mark LaRoche of
Seattle, he is rather famous for a number of restaurants that he has designed and also he
is very big in designing wineries in the Napa Valley. The architect of the project will be
Stan Olson of Olson and Associates of Nampa. He will do the construction documents.
The engineer is Roylance Engineering, the traffic engineer is Bell Walker. Mr. Jim
Parkinson the owner of Sandpiper Restaurants is also here this evening if we need to
prevail on him. A brief description of the restaurant so you know what we intend on doing,
it is a semi rustic steak house operation with lots of volume inside and somewhat of an
9 •
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 16
industrial interior so lots of the ducting will be shown, the grain delivery shoot that goes to
the micro -brewery will be exposed and it will be lots of wood inside. All of the cooking will
be over open displayed custom wood fire grill and rotisserie. This cooking area is out in
the center of the restaurant and there is counter in front of it, it will be very exciting, an all
wood fire. This will be the focal point of the restaurant. The restaurant will also include
a 15 barrel capacity micro -brewing facility which will produce a variety of hand crafted
beers and root beer. Some of the production of this micro -brewery will go to the other
Sandpiper Restaurants located in Idaho and the one in Oregon. The brew pub
components will be highly visible from the entrance to the restaurant from the lounge area
and some of the locations within the restaurant where people will be eating. An outdoor
patio with full food service is also accessible through the brew pub. Needless to say we
are very excited about this project, we have been somewhat delayed by a few minor
workouts with ACHD on the intersection there of Progress and Central Drive. As of Friday
we are satisfied that they are reasonably resolved and that we now with the time constraint
of needing to do working drawings and get a building permit and try and make the building
season we are here before you tonight. We also hope that this is maybe a start of a
successful expansion of this concept throughout states in the west. Please understand as
you look at these drawings and that drawing up there that these are the preliminary design
drawings by Mark LaRoche and when I say approximately 7000 feet and approximately
228 when we get down to the working drawings that might change a little bet but this is
very close. I do have other drawings if you wish to see them either a plot map or a floor
plan and a couple of other elevations showing the volume inside. I would be happy to
share those with you. We accept all of the conditions as proposed by staff and we will
abide by all of the city codes. We request and solicit your approval. We will answer any
questions that you may have. Thank you
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Exley, Council?
Morrow: I have a question, are you going to serve barbecued beef ribs on the menu?
(Inaudible)
Exley: Lots of beef and chicken?
Corrie: Any other questions from Council?
Rountree: Do you feel you have final resolve with ACHD?
Exley: Well Shari was at the meeting Friday and I wasn't, but I am satisfied that the
sufficient steps have been taken to ensure that we have a direct shot from Center Drive
into the commercial area of the Central Valley Corporate Park and that the mitigation
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 17
measure that ACHD wanted for the right turn lane of the McDonalds has been satisfied
and McDonalds has agreed to it. We are under a time constraint and we are willing to go
forward based on the fact that they will resolve it and I think they will. McDonalds has
agreed to it and they are the key. They just have to do the legal documentation. They have
to create a second right hand tum lane and it involves a minor take of that corner. We are
kind of between a rock and a hard place, we don't have a lot of choices. We wanted to
come through and we wanted a straight shot and Nahas the developers of the park wanted
to go through, they understand where we are and we are here for the use permit and we
will have to wrestle that as it presents itself.
Corrie: Any further comments from Council? Staff?
Smith: Mr. Mayor, reading the Highway District's draft report, I just had a question, one
of the items they talked about was left tum should be prohibited on Central Valley between
east first and progress avenue. I am wondering if that meant the left turn into the chevron
and the Taco Time?
Sale: Mr. Mayor, again for the record Larry Sale, Ada County Highway District. First of
all I want to express our appreciation for the patience that this applicant has had or maybe
their contained impatience, but they were the tip of the iceberg so to speak and we were
also hearing from the developer of the overall property that there were going to be some
major traffic generators coming into that intersection and they wanted to make a four way
intersection out of it. I will try to make this long story short. The entire subdivision was
originally approved according to a master plan and a traffic study reflecting that master
plan which indicated that progress avenue and central drive should come to a t -
intersection and it would serve the whole project nicely. The developer comes forth and
makes a four legged intersection out of central and progress and these gentlemen are on
the property next door they are requesting a vacation of an existing platted street right of
way. We wanted to make sure we had all of our ducks in a row if we could and we
requested another traffic study reflecting the revised master plan of the whole area. When
reviewing that that indicates and I am going to give these numbers from memory, so if they
turn out later to be a little incorrect please forgive me. That indicates to be 13,000 trips a
day on central drive between East 1 st and progress, 9,000 of those trips I think will go on
east through this what is going to be a private driveway, extension of central. That is going
to require several things at the point in time that the traffic through the intersection
exceeds 4,000 trips a day, these are what we are going to require of Mr. Nahas the
subdivision developer. There will be an additional, let me back up, what we are requiring
right now of him is that he provide the right of way at the southwest corner of progress and
central on the McDonalds that he provides sufficient right of way there now for a future
right turn lane. If we don't' do it now we lose the handle on everyone. When the trips go
through the intersection exceed 4,000 trips a day there will be a requirement that the
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 18
•
developer construct a new right turn from Central south bound to progress. The two
progress legs will be stopped, with stop signs and central, the through traffic will extend
east and west on central into this private driveway back to the major traffic generator. At
some point in the future probably about that time the highway district will construct a
median in central valley which will prohibit left turns both into the Chevron station and into
that existing driveway into McDonald's which for all intensive purposes is a right in and
right out now because it is so close to East 1st. Central will be widened a bit to allow
enough room for additional left turns at progress. Based on last Wednesday's meeting or
last Friday's meeting I am able to tell you that we think all of the questions have been
resolved that application, Nahas' application goes before the Commission tomorrow. We
will proceed with the vacation of Headway Court and it will be going ahead in due course.
So, I think that I can substantiate the gentleman's statement that it took some time but I
think we got the right answers and they all seem to be in a win win situation right now.
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Sale. Gary
Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor, Mr. Sale your memory recount of figures is exceptional.
Corrie: Any further comments from staff or Council? Hearing none I will entertain a motion.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law
as prepared for us by P & Z.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that we accept the findings
of fact and conclusions of law as adopted by the Planning and Zoning, roll call vote.
ROLL CALF VOTE: Morrow - Yea, Bentley - Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Now I need a motion to approve the conditional use permit. Is there a decision?
Morrow. I would move that the City Council approve the conditional use permit requested
by the applicant for the property described in the application with the conditions set forth
in the findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Rountree: Second
Rountree: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, all those in favor say
• 9
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 19
aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Yes sir
Dolby: My name is Pat Dolby, I am here representing Fred Meyer, the last item on your
agenda, very quickly. There were some comments that I wanted to make and also there
were some questions that came up during the hearing that I would like to have addressed.
I apologize for not speaking sooner and I would be happy to wait until the end of the
meeting if you don't want to revisit the subject at this point in time.
Corrie: Council what is your pleasure, do you want to address it now or at the end?
Morrow. I guess from my perspective I would just as soon press on with the agenda and
address it at the end. I think that the presentation by Mr. Sale was basically one of a fact
finding for the Council based on Councilman Bentley's and my request that he present the
district's position in terms of the transportation issues. We as a City need to make a
decision on how it is we are going to address this particular issue and other issues with
respect to other development agreements in the future. I don't know whether there is an
appropriate forum here to discuss or whether it is a matter that ought to be discussed at
our strategic planning sessions for example. I would throw that to my fellow Council
members to see what their thoughts would be.
Corrie: I understand (inaudible) anxious to have this settled. They are having an opening
date set. I guess Mr. Bentley would you have any comment?
Bentley: No
Corrie: Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: I agree with Walt on deferring hearing anything at this point until after. I wouldn't
mind listening to what Pat has to say.
Corrie: Mr. Tolsma you agree?
Tolsma: I agree
Corrie: Okay we will bring it up at the end of the meeting then Pat.
ITEM #6: TABLED JANUARY 16, 1996: AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND
• 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 20
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST FOR SALMON
RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
Corrie: Council you have the new findings of fact and conclusions of law before you.
What is the Council's pleasure?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve and adopt the findings of fact and
conclusions of law as prepared for us.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion is made that we approve the amended findings of fact and conclusions of
law made by Walt Morrow second by Mr. Rountree, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow - Yea, Bentley - Yea, Rountree - Yea, Tolsma - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Is there a decision?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, the City Council of the City of Meridian hereby decides on approval
of the annexation and zoning as stated above for the property described in the application
with the conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law and those stated
herein including that the minimum house size shall be 1400 square feet except if the
homes are within 500 should read feet of homes in Meridian Greens Subdivision that the
minimum size house shall be 1500 square feet, that the surface water shall be used for
pressurized irrigation if possible that the applicant should extend the guardrail along
Locust Grove Road the number of feet recommended by Ada County Highway District. And
that it was the understanding of the City Council that ACHD would provide the materials
for the guardrail and inspect it. That the applicant shall provide the labor and the applicant
shall post a completion bond for 110% of the value for the work to complete the guardrail.
The applicant shall meet the provisions of the conclusions of law regarding monitoring of
wells specifically complying with section 11-9-605 G 1, regarding planting strips being a
minimum of 20 feet wide and not a part of the street right of way or utility easement. Tile
all ditches, canals and waterways. All is a condition of annexation and that the applicant
meet all the ordinances of the City of Meridian specifically including the development time
requirements and entering into the required development agreement. If the conditions are
not met that the property be de -annexed.
Rountree: Second
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 21
CJ
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, all those approve of the
decision say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: ORDINANCE #718 - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3
SUBDIVISION 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 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 19, T.3N, R.1 E, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO;
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Anyone from the audience wish to have this
ordinance read in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion to accept?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we adopt Ordinance #718 with the suspension of
rules.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow and seconded by Mr. Tolsma that we approve
Ordinance #718 with the suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow - Yea, Bentley - Yea, Rountree - Yea, Tolsma - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #8: TABLED FROM JANUARY 16, 1996: FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3
SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
Corrie: Council you have the facts and findings for the variance, what is your pleasure?
This is block length that extended 1000 feet.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law
as written.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that we approve the findings
of fact and conclusions of law as written, roll call vote.
0 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 22
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley - Yea, Rountree - Yea, Tolsma - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Is there a decision?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, it is hereby decided that the variance requested for a block length
greater than 1000 feet along the Eight Mile Lateral as shown on the preliminary plat is
granted.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma that we approve the decision,
all in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SALMON
RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
Corrie: Counselor?
Crookston: I was supposed to make changes in that development agreement which fit in
with the findings of fact on the annexation, I did not get that done. I can very easily do that
but I need to change that development agreement.
Corrie: I will entertain a motion for tabling.
Morrow: So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree for tabling to the next
meeting on the development agreement all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #10: TABLED FROM JANUARY 16,1996: AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 5 BY INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT:
Corrie: Mr. Morrow?
0 •
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 23
Morrow. The issue her was as I recall some resolution of the curbing issue, the retention
water disposal and I would like to see for the record a presentation made by the
engineering, I know that we have some supporting documentation from both ACHD and
comments by I believe City Engineer Smith, I would like to see a presentation by both
concerning how the questions were resolved.
Corrie: Okay, engineer for Haven Cove No. 5 is here this evening, Mr. Collins?
Collins: The name is David Collins, address is 3350 Americana Terrace, Suite 120, Boise
Idaho. We took the project back after your expressed concerns over the lack of vertical
curb on the east side of North Maura Avenue and re -designed the project in conjunction
and consultation with the Highway District to place the drainage facility to the east of the
sidewalk to place vertical curb along the roadway section there and then provide curb
breaks which would flow water from the street into the swale section. We have done,
Maura did kind of a perspective to try and give an idea of what we think it will look like.
This is what it looks like in other parts of the country that I am familiar with. It is not an
uncommon type of solution to a drainage problem and this was worked out with the
highway district in conjunction with the Mr. Smith. The documents we prepared and we
submitted to them. Any questions?
Morrow. The issue of the road that was narrower than was desired?
Collins: That is back to a 50 foot right of way and 37 feet back to back.
Corrie: Any other questions from Council?
Rountree: Explain the drainage system from the curb to the swale?
Collins: The breaks, the sidewalk and curb sections will end, they are 2 feet wide, they are
the depth of the curb which is .85 feet and they slope 5% down into the swale; they are
concrete all the way into the bottom and up the other side to avoid erosion. The capacity
of the four of them that are provided along N. Maura Way run about 250% of the
anticipated load that is going to be arriving there. They will have a graded structure still
detailing that in conjunction with the highway (inaudible) too much trash going down into
them from the swale. The Ada County Highway District is not a signing member of the
Haven Cove Homeowners Association in regard to the maintenance of this facility and the
homeowners association documents submitted prepared per their requirements and
requests. Mr. Blaser has been working with them and can address the details of that issue
with you.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 24
Collins: Yes
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Collins: It is a vertical curb all the way.
0
Tolsma: So that stops the automobiles from sliding into the swales (inaudible).
Collins: Right, if they are sliding fast enough the curb won't matter they will end up in the
swale anyhow.
Corrie: Further comment Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: What are we doing for culverts underneath the driveway?
Collins: They are three foot wide one foot deep stiff leg concrete boxes. The highway
district was concerned with miter cuts on corrugated metal pipe on the slope where the
pipes cut off to the slope dimension again concerned about a vehicle going off and
crushing that pipe. So we decided to go with a concrete structure as it is shown there I
think. It is a little small this is just a perspective detail.
Bentley: Is there going to be a problem with access by children since it is in a highly
residential area?
Collins: You are asking me to project the future is rather difficult. (Inaudible) I couldn't
have predicted that my 6th child would drown in the canal adjacent to my house when I
moved into that house 25 years ago but she did. If you had asked me 25 years ago I
would have said no problem, but it happened.
Bentley: What I am asking is the size of the pipe is it going to preclude little children from
getting in there?
Collins: No, it is a foot deep, so any child smaller than a foot deep could get through there.
Rountree: The plate covers on the sidewalk, I assume they would be sheet metal?
Collins: Yes, well they would be steel.
Rountree: They would be fastened in such a way that there wouldn't be any obstructions
to pedestrians?
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 25
Collins: Right, probably fastened on the face and on the back side of sidewalk. They just
need to come to the edge of the sidewalk and then they have a flange on the side that
wraps and goes to the back of the sidewalk and they can be bolted down without any
hazards or (inaudible).
Rountree: This drainage then conveys the surface water that doesn't perk into the
drainage lot and I believe it is identified as lot 41?
Collins: Yes, block 1.
Rountree: Is there any provision with the sidewalk and curb at that location to
accommodate in this situation where we might have some snow freezes up against those
inlets (End of Tape)
Collins: (Inaudible) back of sidewalk so there is additional capacity attempting to get the
water totally migrated to it. The one down on the end is just two feet wide and then beyond
that where forecast begins its tangent or straight west run from there there is a catch basin
opening up a regular catch basin, curb opening catch basin.
Rountree: Has then been any consideration to utilization of the drainage lot something
other than a community problem i.e. a tot lot.
Collins: It says that on the plans we submitted, a tot lot.
Rountree: Explain to me what they mean by that?
Collins: Whatever the homeowners association wants to make of it basically.
Rountree: What about the developer wanting to make something of it?
Collins: He hasn't expressed anything to me that he wanted me to put on the plans other
than an indication that it would be a tot lot. The homeowners association documents
indicate it will be kept as the swale be neatly maintained bluegrass. It is the homeowners
responsibility to maintain it that way.
Rountree: I don't have anymore questions.
Corrie: Okay, Council any further questions? Questions from staff? Any comments that
you, (inaudible). Glenn if you would like to explain that I think that might help the Council.
Blaser: I think I have tried to explain everything we have taken, the problems that you
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 26
0
mentioned last Council meeting and we have tried to address them. That is just a sample
that is a swale that exists out on Chateau Meadows and the corner of Chateau Meadows
and Dixie. I took that photograph today. The lot where the pond will sit is really small park.
It is written out there in the manual is it not, down there at the bottom of the page. It says
that the owners may use it for picnics and play area. Then our pond has an overflow into
the Eight Mile Drain or Nine Mile Drain whichever it is. We have two letters and the
highway district has agreed they will have no problem in maintaining them. We have
spelled out in great detail what the homeowner is expected to do and what the
homeowners association will do. I think we have covered it fairly well. If there are any
other questions I would be glad to answer, I appreciate your, we dislike the delay but you
have made a better subdivision out of it I think these improvements have improved our
subdivision rather than injured it. I am so grateful for that.
Corrie: Any questions Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: Your proposed covenants and the maintenance manual for this facility it simply
indicates that the lot may be used, I think the language should be stronger that it will be
used for that and I am asking you would you be willing to dedicate the facilities to make
that a tot lot so it is not (inaudible)
Blaser: On the plat that becomes part of the Ada County Easement, that becomes public
property and a copy of that will be submitted to the City Attorney. I hope that they correct
my grammar and make it in the proper language. But yes we would be willing to do that.
That is our intent.
Corrie: Any further comments or questions? Thank you, Council?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I have a question for Mr. Rountree, what type of improvements for the
tot lot are you thinking of?
Rountree: Playground equipment, similar and I can't remember if it was planning and
zoning in that capacity or something we heard last month, in the Fothergill area. They
identified a tot lot and they identified playground equipment that would be installed in the
tot lot. And they further expanded their tot lot to something bigger than this and included
a half court basketball which is not big enough. It would not accommodate this lot.
Crookston: That was not Fothergill it was Bedford.
Rountree: But it is adjacent to Fothergill, that is what I meant.
Morrow: And essentially if I understood Mr. Blaser he agreed to that, some sort of
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 27
playground equipment.
0
Blaser: Yes, I have a government subsidized apartment house and they are making us
stake out all the swings in that because of the liability to the government. We had play
equipment and I noticed the City of Boise has taken out even slip and slides because of
that. We originally intended to put up a basketball court. If you have any good
suggestions we will be glad to do it. But we run into the problem of being sued for
everything nowadays but we will, it will be available it will be mowed, have a sprinkler
system in it and it belongs to the Ada County, it is part of their easement. But it is for the
use of the homeowners association who is obligated to maintain it. I imagine they can put
anything in there they want and we will put something in there if you suggest it. We are
all for taking care of the kids but (inaudible) 20 years and nobody has been hurt and now
they are making me take them out.
Morrow. I agree with Mr. Rountree, I think I would like to see the tot lot jump started by the
development folk.
Blaser: Any suggestions you have there we will try and incorporate them, that was our
intention that we would do something.
Morrow: Thank you Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: I guess we are ready (inaudible).
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the amended preliminary plat for Haven
Cove Subdivision NO. 5 by Interwest Development subject to all staff conditions, all ACHD
conditions to and including the requirements by ACHD to be part of the restrictive
covenants and that the developer be required to develop out the tot lot.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow and second by Mr. Rountree, you have heard the
motion, all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I have a question for the counselor, these restrictive covenants for
Haven Cove No. 5 that were in our packet, was that a prototype or were we required to
approve those also?
Crookston: You are required to approve them.
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 28
Morrow: My question is it is not on the agenda. I want to make sure that it is clear in
everybody's mind when that is going to be done. Have you reviewed these as of yet?
Crookston: I looked at them tonight quickly, I would like to spend some more time on them.
Morrow: So the approval of the restrictive covenants could be an agenda item for the
following meeting on the 20th?
Corrie: Yes, they have to be approved before the signing of the preliminary plat or the final
plat. We can do it at the next meeting if the Counselor can (inaudible).
(Discussion Inaudible)
Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, usually the restrictive covenants are submitted with
the final plat for our review and for your approval. At that time the City Attorney and myself
and Shari will look at those along with yourself.
Corrie: Is that okay with Council?
Morrow. That is fine with me, I want to make sure everybody understands even though we
have a prototype of the restrictive covenants the point I think of that is to show us that.
ACHD's concerns have been addressed. I want to make sure we are sensitive to that when
we go to adopt those, the point of my question.
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Morrow, good point.
ITEM #11: ORDINANCE #721 - ELLIOTT INDUSTRIAL CO. ANNEXATION:
Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND BEING
A PART OF LOT 6, PLEASANT VALLEY SUBDIVISION ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL
PLAT THEREOF, FILED IN BOOK 12 OF PLATS PAGE 665, RECORDS OF ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO AND LYING IN THE NW 1/4 SECTION 8, T.3N, R.1 E, B.M., ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AND EFFECTIVE DATE. Anyone from the public
that would like to have it read in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we approve Ordinance #721 with the suspension of rules.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma, to approve ordinance #721
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 29
with the suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow - Yea, Bentley - Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #12: ORDINANCE #722 - HAVEN COVE NO. 6 SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION:
Corrie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND BEING
A PORTION OF THE W 1/2 OF THE SE 1/4 OF THE NE 1/4, SECTION 11, T.3N, R.1 W,
BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE. Anyone from the public wish to have this ordinance read in its entirety? Hearing
none I will entertain a motion for Ordinance #722.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move we approve ordinance #722 with suspension of rules.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma that we adopt Ordinance
#722 with suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma - Yea, Rountree - Yea, Bentley - Yea, Morrow - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #13: ORDINANCE #723 - DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FOR PARKS:
Corrie: We have a discussion before we do this I believe, Mr. Crookston would you please
talk to us?
Counselor: Yes, the ordinance as it was prepared did not include credits to a developer
that does put in a park system. The way the development impact fee statute reads that is
required to be in the ordinance. We need to have that put in and because we have not had
it in there previously we need to hold one more public hearing on that.
Corrie: Any discussion from the Council?
Morrow. I guess my question is do we need to do a public hearing or an amendment to the
ordinance?
r]
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 30
0
Corrie: (Inaudible) it is my understanding from the counselor would require another public
hearing which would be on the 27th of February for the proposed changes which is the
credits and at that time we can approve the ordinance and 30 days from there it will
become effective.
Morrow: The 27th of February?
Corrie: That is as soon as we can do it.
Crookston: It becomes effective 30 days after the 27th.
Corrie: After it is passed, it will be published quite a few times.
Crookston: It will be published before the 30 days runs it will have been published.
Morrow. So my question is what meeting are we going to hear this?
(Inaudible)
Morrow: So we will have a public hearing prior to our special workshop.
Corrie: Yes, it would be on the 27th, a public hearing.
Morrow: And that is the soonest we can hold the meeting?
Corrie: Yes, okay so we will have a public hearing do we need a motion on that?
Morrow. So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree a public hearing for the 27th
to the proposed changes to the impact fee, do we need a time, 6:00, all those in favor say
aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #14: FINAL PLAT: HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 6, 5 LOTS BY JOHN EDDY:
Corrie: Council? Staff, any questions?
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 31
0
Smith: Mr. Mayor, Council members, our comments have been responded to by the
applicants engineer and they have answered the City Engineer's comments.
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Smith.
Morrow. Shari your comments, are you comfortable?
Stiles: Councilman Morrow and Mayor and Council yes I am.
Morrow. My question would be this is a final plat, restrictive covenants status?
Rountree: The application says they are forthcoming.
Corrie: We can approve but it cannot be signed.
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, we had commented on the requirement for them
to submit the restrictive covenants and their response was that a copy of the proposed
covenants will be submitted to the City Clerk's office for review. You are correct, the
ordinance does require the Council to approve of the covenants.
Corrie: I guess the Council has the decision of whether or not they want to do it.
(Inaudible) CC&R's and do it at the next meeting.
(Inaudible)
Morrow. I don't disagree with that, we will have those in the two week period so that we
can adopt everything. I don't have any problem at all with this proposal. So, the covenants
can be here, fine, I would move that we table this until our February 20th meeting and at
that time we would act on both the final plat and the covenants.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Mr. Eddy?
Eddy: The restrictive covenants will be the same as Have Cove No. 4 and No. 5.
Corrie: Any discussion made on the motion? We had a motion made by Mr. Morrow and
seconded by Mr. Rountree any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion say
aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 32
ITEM #15: FINAL PLAT: GEMTONE BUSINESS CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1, 1 LOT
BY GEMTONE INC.:
Rountree: I have a question for both Mr. Smith and Ms. Stiles. Have the questions and
comments you provided been responded to?
Smith: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Rountree yes they have.
Rountree: Satisfactorily?
Smith: I guess there was one comment we raised about the dedication of the right of way
along the extension of Pine Avenue. They responded that phase 2 of this subdivision of
Gemtone, Gemtone No. 2 subdivision would be submitted within 120 days which would
include the dedication of that portion of the street. Their major issue with this plat is to get
done as soon as possible so that property can be conveyed to their prospective purchaser
Blue Cross. The dedication of right of way at this time would be, the Highway District
would hold up signing of the plat until all the improvement plans were improved for that
length of Pine Extended. So that is why they want to delay the inclusion of that portion of
Pine right of way until the next phase. Their engineer's letter says that will be done within
120 days. The second phase would be submitted to us I believe. Their representative is
here this evening President of Gemtone is here as well as their engineer. I am sure they
can respond to that also.
Corrie: Mr. Rountree would you like to have them respond?
Rountree: Did Shari have any other comments? She got up and left I don't know.
Morrow: I would like to see Mr. Mayor a presentation by the engineer.
Bowcutt: I am here tonight kind of pinch hitting for Van this is Mr. Elg's project and he had
a sledding accident with his children and his back is out and he can't be here this evening.
So I am subbing here. As you well know this particular lot here is 24.72 acres that is the
proposed Blue Cross office facility. We are platting that one lot originally it was proposed
for 32 smaller commercial type lots and they basically have not substantially changed their
plan, just eliminated lot lines and created one large lot. The issue, I think the question was
Pine Street, we have to expedite this to get the project up and running, they need to close
immediately so they can get underway in their design and so forth. So it was essential that
we cut down on the review time therefore the best way to do that was not to plat Pine with
this Phase 1 but to plat Pine with this Phase 2. We have done this before on other projects
where a particular street is platted with the second phase and it runs out in a singular
fashion or if this were the first phase it would run out and then this would be platted at a
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 33
later time. We have done it vice versa, it doesn't create a problem. This did process
through Ada County Highway District, the final plat, the revision of the preliminary, it was
approved, they understand it was that we are doing this. The review time does take quite
a while. This property has legal frontage on Eagle Road, we have our right of way permits
in hand from the Idaho Department of Transportation, they are also signed by Ada County
Highway District so the property has access and frontage to Eagle Road. We are just
basically trying to do this in the quickest fashion we can. There are lots of agencies we
still have to go through. Do you have any other questions that I can answer?
Tolsma: (Inaudible) proposed Pine Avenue?
Bowcutt: I think they have a phased project and I think Tom can answer that question a
little bit better. They do have this one direct approach here and they show one ingress and
egress here. I am not sure where they are phasing and how that works out.
Wright: That is an affirmative, there is an access on Pine Avenue right here, an access
on Eagle Road right there and and access on whatever we end up calling that, I think
Eagle Brook has been outlawed. Anyway this north south street and by the way
(inaudible).
Tolsma: When will this Pine Street project be installed?
Wright: Immediately, we only have half of the Pine Street Mr. Councilman, but we will be
paving, curbing, guttering, sidewalking, all of that all of this street and as part of this
second phase that Becky just told you about this here and this here as well.
Tolsma: You are just not platting it at this particular time?
Wright: Well (inaudible) it is in the process, we will have that to ACHD within
Bowcutt: We ate working on those construction drawings right now.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Wright: No, virtually it is simultaneously for all projects. As part of our contract with Blue
Cross we have to put in these improvements within 120 days of closing. We hope to close
sometime this month or we expect to close sometime this month.
Crookston: Question, Mr. Wright you are the owner of the property are you not?
Wright: That is correct Mr. Crookston.
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 34
Crookston: Do your covenant to put in Pine Street that not being part of this plat being
required by ACHD and the City of Meridian?
Wright: Yes we do.
Corrie: Thank you Tom.
Rountree: I have one question on the plat I have, I can't read your Becky, the width for the
future subdivision of Pine, is that 45 feet?
Bowcutt: I believe it is 45 feet from centerline.
Wright: The right of way Mr. Councilman is 45 feet, it would be 90 feet entirely. We will
pave the north half of the street curb, gutter and sidewalk.
Bowcutt: It is 45 from centerline so like you said a total 90 foot and a 41 back to back.
Corrie: Thank you Becky, any further questions from Council?
Morrow: I have one for Gary Smith, the sewer easement issue that we were working on
that is approximate to this property has that issue been resolved?
Smith: Yes it has, I received a revised second sheet from Mr. Wright's attorney Friday I
believe. They had deleted that paragraph that I was concerned about. They have been
very receptive and helpful on resolving that.
Morrow: I would like to thank Tom for the help in getting that resolved. It solves a lot of
problems for us as a City and the school district and allows some real progress to go
forward and it was with Tom's help and Gary's diligence that got accomplished. So with
that we will press forward. I have nothing further Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Hearing nothing more from staff and Council I will entertain a motion for final plat
approval.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the final plat for Gemtone Business Center No. 1
lot 1.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma for the final plat approval of
Gemtone Business Center Subdivision No. 1 all those approve say aye? Opposed?
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 35
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #16: BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR PAISANO'S ITALIAN RESTAURANT:
Corrie: Council your pleasure, I have the application here. I guess my only question would
be the Chief of Police, is everything in order?
Gordon: I have no problem at all contrary to Mr. Morrows barbecue ribs we already know
they are going to serve lasagna.
Rountree: I guess I have a question for me in the way of education this is the first one I
have seen what is the process?
Corrie: We approve the application for a beer and wine license. The beer is by bottle and
can and the wine is by the drink.
Rountree: I see that everyone else issues a permit do we issue a permit as well?
Corrie: Yes
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move we approve the application for a beer and wine license for
Paisanos' Italian Restaurant.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Bentley for the beer and wine
license for Paisano's Italian Restaurant, all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #17: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION FOR FILING OF THE FINAL PLAT FOR
HARTFORD SUBDIVISION:
Corrie: Everybody on the Council have that request from them, any questions?
Morrow. An editorial comment, they are anticipating platting to begin in the spring/summer
of 19961 think but probably we extend this as normal for one year.
Corrie: I believe the letter is dated December the 18, 1995 so it would be one year from
that point or do you want to extend it from spring/summer of 1996 1 guess is my question.
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 36
Morrow: I guess it would make sense to do it one year from today, so I would so move.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that extend the final plat
approval one year from today, all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #18: WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
Corrie: Delinquency for February, turn off scheduled for February 14, 1996. This is to
inform you in writing if you choose to you have the right to a pre -determined meeting at
7:30 P.M. February 6, 1996 before the Mayor and Council to be judged on the facts and
defend the claim made by the City that your water, sewer and trash bill are delinquent.
You may retain counsel. Your service will be discontinued on February 14, 1996 unless
payment is received in full. Is there anyone present who wishes to contest their sewer,
water and trash delinquency? Seeing none they are hereby informed they may appeal or
have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court pursuant to
Idaho Code. Even though they appeal their water will be shut off. The amount of the turn
off list is $18,874.87. Council?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the water, sewer, trash delinquency turn
off list.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that the water, sewer and trash
delinquency be turned off effective February 14, 1996 as listed, all those in favor say aye?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #19: APPROVE BILLS:
Corrie: The Council will be receiving these monthly as well as quarterly from now on. I
apologize for not getting it sooner, we have had some problems with personnel not getting
it out to you.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, point of discussion here, it is the Council's responsibility by State
statute to institute some sort of procedure (inaudible) Council is held accountable for audit
0 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 37
to paying of the bills. At this point in time the Council hasn't determined how it is going to
proceed with that requirement by the State statutes. For those reasons I will be voting
opposed to the approval of the bills until that issue has been resolved and until I have had
personnel time to review this format and decide whether or not it is acceptable to me.
Corrie: Alright.
Rountree: I have a question for Councilman Morrow, subject to discussion maybe at our
next workshop as part of the agenda.
Morrow: That is an appropriate forum.
Rountree: Is that agenda full?
Morrow. I don't believe we have set that agenda as of yet, it is always full, we have plenty
of things that we need to be discussing. This is obviously a priority issue.
Rountree: It seems to me that this is a priority. I too would like some time to review this
information and see if it tells me what I believe I think I need to know with the charges
given. I would suggest that we put this on the agenda for our next workshop on the 27th.
Morrow. I don't have a problem with that, maybe we put it on the agenda as the number
one priority issue with a back up of the job descriptions and salary ranges that we are
working on for the personnel manual. I think the other issues that we were going to
discuss were water and sewer hook up rates and fees (inaudible) on that same agenda.
So that would be agreeable with me.
Corrie: That being said, what are we going to do about the bills until then?
Smith: Mr. Mayor, I guess I would like a clarification for myself, each month through the
sewer and water department and parks department we receive billings for our operations.
These are all placed on purchase orders and the major expenses for those departments
are discussed with me before they are committed to. Obviously we have budget line items
that we diligently work to stay within for the operations of the departments. I guess I am
concerned that if these bills that have been submitted to us for expenditures that we have
made are not authorized for payment that we would be subjecting our creditors to some
real stress as far as future extension of credit to us for products or services. Excuse me
one other thing that I would like to ask for some clarification. Historically we try to get our
creditors our suppliers to send their bills to us so that we have them in time to finalize
purchase orders and submit the purchase orders through the necessary channels for
approvals, but some times it doesn't happen and they will drag through beyond the first
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 38
meeting of the Council. I guess I would need some clarification as to action on those
particular bills at the first council meeting or not. If, I guess what I need is some
clarification do we need to notify the people that we do business with that they have to
have the bills to us by the first of each month or payment if it is not received that time they
will not be paid. Because it is going to take some time to get the purchase orders finished,
submitted to the Mayor for his review and approval and onto the Treasurer for cutting of
the check.
Rountree: Is your question Gary that or is it couched in a possible solution or
recommendation on your part?
Smith: Well, I guess, this is a Council decision as to how you are going to proceed on the
approval of the bills if what you want to see is an accounting of individual billings for your
approval at the first Council meeting. Then we would need to notify the people that we do
business with that they have to have bills to us by a certain date and that is an absolute
cut off date beyond which payment may not be made or payment may not be received. We
can do that, I assume. I am not sure how other businesses operate whether they can get
billings out that fast or not. Because some of them run their books through I suspect the
last day of the month and it would just be impossible for them to get us a bill by the sixth
or by whatever time we need to process it through our departments and onto you for
approval.
Corrie: I think also Council that this date changes monthly, it could be the first, the second
or the 10th. I remind Council that all of the bills that are submitted to your for payment are
on purchase orders and those purchase orders are on file for your constant review anytime
you want. I have had a discussion with Mr. Morrow and I have no problems with the
Council signing every bill, if they want to sign every bill they can. It saves me from doing
everyone of them that I do. I think that there is a problem here with the way things were
done before, they are not being done that way now. I think that the public should be aware
of the fact that we don't have commissioners anymore. I wish to bring up that point at this
meeting that every Councilman has a chance to look at those P.O.'s they can go to any
department head and question any one of them. You also have a perfect right to challenge
any P.O. as a Council. I would just caution you to not to make it a big problem here as you
say you do have that right but you can squeeze (inaudible) problems with our payments
(inaudible) micro -managing (inaudible) whatever you want. I feel that we are causing
some difficult problems here and I guess the Council is going to have to make that
decision. Any comment, Mr. Morrow?
Morrow. I think the issue here for the Council is to decide how it wants to fulfill its statutory
function with respect to the responsibility for the bills and the financial affairs. In view of
the fact that formerly each Councilman was required to sign P.O.'s for each department
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 39
the audit function in a sense was done in that manner each Councilman was signing for
the other three Councilmen and meeting the requirement of the State statute. Without that
process being in place it is now up to the Council to determine how it wishes to fulfill that
statutory function. I think that we as a Council need to discuss how it is we want to fulfill
that function. It appears to me it is an appropriate discussion for the Council to proceed
with posthaste so we give the staff direction. Certainly cut off dates for the billings are a
standard within the construction industry that is not out of line with Mr. Smith's request.
So, I think that we as a Council need to determine what direction we want to go since we
are responsible for that function. (End of Tape)
Corrie: I agree, I have no problem with that at all. I think that the Council needs to decide
how they want to do it. I didn't, (inaudible) like that situation because I was having another
Councilman taking my word for everything I think each Councilman should have the
opportunity to go to each department and have a look at them. That is my viewpoint
(inaudible) in the meantime what do we do with these bills now?
Rountree: Well my position right now is I have had a chance to look at this for about 6
minutes and I am being asked to make a decision on a half million dollars worth of
expenditures and I am not going to do it in six minutes. I want a chance to look at this to
get familiar with it. I recognize the necessity to get it done in a hurry. I would be willing to
meet whenever we have to to get this done.
Corrie: I can call a special meeting, when do you think you would like to have it? I
apologize for not having this done, we have been, the City Treasurer has been swamped
and everything else.
Rountree: I understand.
Corrie: Whatever time you think you need I will call a special meeting.
Rountree: Well as soon as we can have one. I am not going to take more than a day to
look at this. The first part of next week or the middle of next week I am not going to be
here.
Corrie: By Friday is that too soon for anyone on the Council to look this over?
Morrow. From my perspective after having been out of town for 10 days it may be too soon.
My preference would be a week from today prior to Mr. Rountree's leaving.
Rountree: Which would be the 12th, Monday.
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 40
Morrow. That is fine with me.
Corrie: Mr. Bentley, Mr. Tolsma.
Berg: The school board meets on Monday usually in this room
Corrie: We don't have to meet in this room, we can meet in my office for that matter.
Berg: This is a public meeting. The other thing is that some of these bills for instance Blue
Cross Insurance, things are due on the 15th. We usually have everything ready to be paid
and mailed out on the 15th. That is why the timing every month when you have your first
meeting of the month is anywhere from the 6th (inaudible). That is just another (inaudible).
Corrie: Well I would say (inaudible) Mr. Rountree feels he can do it in a day or two, Mr.
Morrow doesn't want to do it that quick, how does the rest of the Council feel on the 9th
Mr. Bentley, Mr. Tolsma?
(Inaudible)
Morrow. Can we not on Monday have the meeting prior to the school board meeting, this
is a two minute meeting.
Berg: Yes you could they have an executive session at 5:30, that is when they hold their
executive sessions and then they hold their regular meeting at 7:00 or whatever it is.
Morrow: The meeting could be at 5:00 or 5:15 for our purposes.
(Discussion Inaudible)
Corrie: Okay we will have a special meeting, we can post that or notice it, special meeting
at 5:00 p.m. to approve this month's bills on the 12th, motion please.
Rountree: So moved
Morrow. Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Morrow, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 41
Smith: Mr. Mayor, may I ask a clarification, from my own education I guess I would be
curious to know what will the Council look at or what will the Council be looking for when
you review the bills?
Corrie: I guess we will have to ask the Council that.
Smith: The reason I ask the question is that these bills are for expenditures that or services
or products that we have committed to that we have taken possession of. I guess it, I can't
say, I don't want to say the barn door is open and the horse is out but basically it is. If we
buy a pick up for example which we did last month that pick up is in the yard at the water
department. We took delivery of that pick up. We rented a crane to stabilize the water line
across Ten Mile Drain to the tune of $6900 for one episode and some more money on
another episode. I guess I am curious, I understand that you are responsible for the
expenditures of the City and I guess part of my responsibility as your employee is to make
expenditures that are in accordance with the budget that has been approved by the City
Council and Mayor.
Rountree: To your question Gary, for me at least at this point in time it is a matter of
getting familiar with the budget report, not having seen it before and having an opportunity
to come to you and ask questions about those sorts of things. So when we have our
special meeting on the 27th we can resolve how it is as a Council we are going to deal with
those issues specifically. Hopefully (inaudible) situation in March.
Crookston: You are not taking action though are you on the 27th? Or is that your thinking
that you will take action in a strategic planning session?
Rountree: I don't' think we are going to take action but at least we are going to have an
idea of what might be proposed in terms of Council activity.
Corrie: It is my understanding that we will be there (inaudible) $487,464,09 of bills, that is
in the special meeting the 12th. The 27th meeting we will have the discussion on how the
Council wants to work the system that they went to.
Crookston: I just comment that you are going to do a strategic planning session and we
had never voted in that meeting.
Corrie: (Inaudible)
Rountree: We can at least hash it out so we get the ideas and take care of it in March.
Corrie: I think it is appropriate that we do this and get it well on its way the way we are
0 •
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 42
going to do it.
Rountree: Does that get your concern Gary, I know you have bills to pay.
Smith: I just need to know what you want me to do. So that if the people that we do
business with if their payment is delayed to a point where they are calling I want to be able
to tell them what is happening.
Morrow. I think the answer to your question is that we don't know yet what procedure we
are going to use. The better answer to the question or the next part of the answer is that
no that they won't be delayed and we as a Council have not determined how we are going
to do this process so we don't have any answer to most of your question at this time. I think
it is fair to say that you will probably see a cut off date started because that is an industry
standard.
Smith: I understand that and that is fine. I don't have a problem with that at all.
Morrow: Beyond that at this point I don't have any suggestions or any answers for your
questions. It is a new area for all of us.
Smith: I understand that Councilman Morrow. The purchase orders that flow through the
public works department for water, sewer and parks as Mayor Corrie has said they are
always open to your questions if you have any. I post a summary sheet for water and
sewer department for all purchases of which I give a copy to Mayor Corrie and I initial the
larger purchases so that he knows that I have seen those. Those things, we are dealing
with public money and that record is always available for you to look at. I certainly don't
have any concerns I don't want you to think that I have any concerns because I don't. It
is just a matter of a change in policy the way we have been doing things to the way the
Mayor wants to do things now. I just need to be able to notify that my departments do
business with as to what is expected of them so that they can get paid in a reasonable
length of time. One of the things that we have had to address with some contractors in the
past on our larger projects is timeliness of payment. Because they have been, they tell me
stories of not being paid for 45 days after the point that they submit request for payment.
They are quite concerned about that and I don't want to have them get into a situation
where they will put some interest or some additional expense onto a project just because
of the timeliness of receiving their funds. But that is something we can talk about on the
27th.
Morrow: And will.
Smith: Thank you
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 43
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, Mr. Crookston requested a recess.
Corrie: Okay, let's take a five minute recess.
FIVE MINUTE RECESS
ITEM #20: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
0
Corrie: Wayne Crookston, City Attorney, the Bill Howell Annexation. I guess we need to
find out if we are going to do an ordinance.
Crookston: I didn't know this had been put on the agenda, it wasn't my request but we did
not have a request for an ordinance to be prepared when the findings of fact were
approved. So my question is do you desire an ordinance?
Morrow. The answer is I would move to instruct the City Attorney to prepare the annexation
ordinance.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: The motion has been made and second that we instruct the City Attorney to draft
the ordinance on the Bill Howell Annexation, discussion? The motion was made by Mr.
Morrow and second by Mr. Rountree, any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of
the ordinance say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Mr. Counselor if you will prepare that for us. Mr. Smith?
Smith: Nothing Mr. Mayor
Corrie: Chief?
Gordon: Nothing your honor.
Corrie: Anybody else over at that table I can't see? Wayne Crookston?
Crookston: That is all I have.
Corrie: Mr. Morrow?
0 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 44
Morrow: I have, I would like a status report, Shari is not here. What I want to know is
where we are at with the project across the street and we have been asking for (inaudible)
that would be the paintball problem that we are trying to resolve. I would like a status
report on that.
Corrie: Wayne, do you have anything on that?
Crookston: I have discussed it with Shari but I have not taken any particular action. We
need to send them a demand. Shari wanted a demand letter sent to them. The problem
where we are at is previous dealings that we have made regarding that property were sent
to Jay Amyx. If the problem over there is the automobiles and things of that nature than
that is very appropriate. If it is the paint or the paint gun, the game if that is it than we need
to send them an entirely new demand.
Morrow. Well that is the issued that we started with on 12-14-95 when it was brought to
the attention of Shari and Jim Rabbit prior to 12-14-95 because his staff report to us is
dated 12-14-95. That is almost 2 months ago my question is where are we on the
resolution of this. If we need to send a letter let's get it moving.
Crookston: Do you know what the status is Shari?
Stiles: Mayor and Council, I believe he had drafted a letter that he sent to you Wayne?
Crookston: I do not recall, that is not to say that I did not receive it. I am not recalling that
letter. He could have very well have sent it.
Stiles: I thought that Jim had done pretty much all that he could do. We are back to the
point of them not even meeting the conditions of the original conditional use permit which
was that they would meet all fire and building codes.
Corrie: I think Shari's recommendation was that we pull the conditional use permit, is that
the letter that you are thinking about?
Stiles: He didn't write one to that effect, he wrote one that it was, they were in violation
because of the cars.
Corrie: That is not the paint thing?
Stiles: Well the paint thing was because of the vandalism. I am sorry I can't remember
exactly what he did but I know he has written a letter to Joe Amyx for Wayne's signature
but if he doesn't have a copy of that I will have to get him another copy and follow up with
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 45
Jim to see exactly where he is at.
Morrow: The memorandum that I am referring to is specifically directed to the Gotcha
paintball, it says in part included in this report are letters from Fire Marshall Voss, Building
Inspector Whitman which describe several fire and building code violations. The staff feels
that these should be brought to the Council's attention because of the safety issues
involved. A possible course of action is to revoke Mr. Covino's conditional use permit until
such time as the structure is safe and suitable for occupancy. There is attached to that
report also Mr. Whitman's inspection report, Mr. Voss's inspection report. We are 60 days
down the road I want to know where we are at and how expeditiously we can expect to get
something accomplished here.
Corrie: Well (inaudible) conditional use permit away. They made the recommendation
what is the Council going to do?
Crookston: It depends on whether or not the Mr. Covino if that is where the problem is was
informed of that. I will do that (inaudible)
Morrow. I think part of the process is a due process for Mr. Covino and to the best of my
knowledge the City has done nothing in terms of getting that notification or acting on this
because I think the Council's instructions were that we wanted to press forward with this.
That was in December I believe.
Corrie: So I guess it lies with the City Attorney to do the due process, does that meet with
your approval Mr. Morrow?
Morrow. Yes it does.
Corrie: Council? Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: In light of our meeting last might it has becomes apparent to me that the Council
needs to start taking a look at some of our ordinances. It is apparent to me that they need
some teeth put into some of them. Maybe we can schedule that on the strategic planning
to devise a way to do some review and updating. That is all I have.
Corrie: Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: I don't have any specific items other than I would like to extend a thank you to
the City staff, Gary and Shari both (inaudible) other folks that have made this transition
from Planning and Zoning to City Council comfortable for me. It has been interesting
finding out the other facets (inaudible).
• 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 46
Corrie: Mr. Tolsma?
Tolsma: Nothing for me.
Corrie: Okay, I would like to appoint Glenn Bentley to the APA Board, we have an opening
there. Mr. Bentley said he could do that, it is down in the City of Boise, we have those
meetings at 1:30 in the afternoons on Mondays. So, I would like to appoint Mr. Bentley as
the representative from the City Council. Any discussion, any questions?
Morrow. Question, what historically has been, who have been our representatives from the
APA Board?
Corrie: Ron Tolsma was for the last year and a half and at that time has not attended any
of the meetings. We need somebody that can attend the meetings and I thought that Mr.
Bentley since his work is in downtown Boise he could get to it a lot easier than any of the
others with jobs in town. Not faulting Mr. Tolsma he has been very busy. So that is one
of the reasons I thought Mr. Bentley could handle that since he is already there.
Morrow. Question Mr. Tolsma? Historically, you were delegated to attend the meetings?
We have two representatives on the APA Board?
Corrie: You have the Mayor and one City Councilman. I will entertain a motion to accept
Mr. Bentley as the appointment.
Rountree: So moved
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that Mr. Bentley be accepted as the Council member
on the APA Board, all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: I guess we now need to have the City Clerk.
Berg: I have a house keeping issue, the vacation of an easement and Wayne please help
me out with this. In the past we have had an ordinance prepared for Jeff Loffer, do you
remember that project. You approved the vacation of an easement so we need a motion
from the City Council to have the City Attorney prepare an ordinance for that vacation.
Morrow. So moved
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 47
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree for the ordinance to be
prepared for the Jeff Loffer vacation of easement, all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Let's go back to agenda item #4 which is the width improvement of locust grove
road at Fred Meyers.
ITEM #4: ACHD: WIDTH IMPROVEMENT OF N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD AT FRED
MEYERS:
Corrie: Council has heard the Ada County Highway's proposal they say a four lane road
our (inaudible) say five lane road. So I guess we need more clarification on what we
decide to do here. We have to amend the agreement or fight Ada County Highway.
Would you like to speak on this one, I am sorry your name again?
Dolby: Mr. Mayor, my name is Pat Dolby, I am here representing Fred Meyers tonight. First
of all they would like to express their appreciation of the cooperation and the problem
solving attitude the City has shown them through this land approval process. I came to the
meeting this evening just to collect information and find out exactly where the City was in
their negotiations with the Highway District over the width of the road. In the process
several things came up and I think they have raised new questions at least in my mind and
I know that these are questions that Fred Meyer is going to need addressed in order to
keep their scheduled opening of June 6th on schedule to keep the project on track.
Specifically it is their understanding that the requirement of the Highway District was to
construct essentially half of a 60 foot back to back street section. Earlier this evening it
was suggested that the City has a condition that they construct a five lane road. They are
not familiar with that condition and quite frankly I am not familiar with that condition.
Having read the development agreement I would really appreciate a clarification as to
where that condition is coming from. If it is a condition that they need to comply with I
believe they have no problems in doing it. They have already paid over close to $400,000
in impact fees to the highway district which would build a 12 lane road out there if that is
what you want. They are at the point right now where they are ready to build something
and we really do need some direction as to what to build. As I said a second ago, I have
read through the development agreement with the City and I fail to find any reference
whatsoever to a five lane road. I think that is the critical point.
Corrie: Shari?
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 48
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council the five lane road was not stipulated as a condition of the
development. It is City policy to require five lane roads on all section line roads. The
requirement was to dedicate 45 feet from the centerline of Locust grove road including
necessary bike lanes. Also as part of the minutes that were taken as testimony it was
stated that by Mr. Durkin, that when the store is open there will be a center turn lane, two
lanes going north on Locust Grove and one lane going south on Locust Grove, I don't
believe that is what is being proposed by ACHD at this time.
Corrie: That would make it a four lane road but the striping would be different correct?
Stiles: It would be a four lane road without any additional requirement for right of way from
the people on the west side.
Corrie: Counselor what do you think here?
Crookston: I would have to look at the development agreement and the minutes what
representations were make to be able to give you a better assessment of what the situation
is on the Locust Grove roadway.
Corrie: Council members any discussion?
Rountree: Having heard what Shari just read I am not sure what the issue is now. the
issue with me is ACHD with the impact fees are getting ought to build a whole intersection.
Morrow: I guess the philosophical discussion that we need to have and what ACHD is
telling us by virtue of our meeting two weeks ago Friday or ten days ago was that they are
not privy to our development agreements and the issues and stipulations that we as a
Council put on a project. I think that they are also indicating that they are having some
second thoughts about design and roadway build out as we are seeing by Mr. Sale's
presentation tonight. What the Council approved for Fred Meyer project was exactly what
Shari read why we had this brought before the Council was because of the conflict
between what ACHD was willing to require to be built and what it was we as Council
wanted. I believe and I think I am stating fairly the implication in the meeting with Mr. Sale
was that ACHD was responsible for the roadways and that it was kind of a take it or leave
it deal. I think that by virtue of tonight's testimony that if we are looking at a four lane
section and a 14 foot outside bay earlier in the evening on item #3 we heard a
presentation by Mr. Olen talking about bike lanes and alternate transportation so on and
so forth and Mr. Sale's presentation of the four lane road seems to preclude striped bike
lanes. And so I guess part of what has to happen here I guess is we need to determine
in fairness to the Fred Meyer people how we want to resolve a particular issue but we also
need to take steps at the City to determine what it is we want and then try to get ACHD to
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 49
honor those requests. Because obviously here if we are going to (inaudible) wide outs or
turn lanes at the intersections and just a 14 foot outside bay for a four lane road than what
becomes of the program for bike lanes on the 90 foot right of ways. That is the first
question in my mind. Second question is that certainly part of a good transportation plan
is to be able to have the capabilities to move goods and services and people relatively
quickly, do away with rear end accidents which 2 lane and four lane roads have a lot of.
A three or a five lane road with a turn bay eliminates a lot of that. So I think really there
are two questions. One is to repeat myself is how do we handle the immediate issue with
the Fred Meyer thing and secondly is how do we deal with ACHD. Now part of the
suggestion in the meeting was that we make sure that they are aware of our development
agreements and that we have a representative of the City at the technical review meetings.
Lary can see that they, in response to Shari's question she didn't want to go down there
and spend half or 3/4 of the day waiting for our issues to come up on the tech review
wasting her time and the Cities time. Larry's response was that also he can define a better
window for her or someone else to attend the meeting and maybe get these points across.
So in a nut shell that is kind of where we are at. I guess those are the issues that we need
to decide.
Rountree: I understand your issues with ACHD, but I am still not sure what is the issue with
the Fred Meyers. Our development agreement only talks about 4 lanes, it is a matter of
how they are going to stripe it to make it operate. And ACHD is talking about four lanes
with a different operation. I don't hear anything that says five lanes. We need to
transition.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, as Walt says I sat in on part of that meeting too and I picked up from
that meeting pretty much what Walt did that it is a take it our leave it issue. He didn't want
to tear out some old road and redo it and put the five in because he felt it wouldn't get used
for many years. I also felt by that meeting and the testimony he gave tonight that we seem
to be missing the boat on communication on some of these issues as to what we require
and what they are willing to give. I think we have to build some sort of communication line
and make sure they know what our plans are for here. That is all I have got.
Corrie: Well it sounds like the four lanes is what we have got for an agreement with you
folks and I agree with Charlie I don't think we have a problem with you or the four lanes.
Morrow. I think the issue in terms of the Fred Meyer property is that the intent of what the
Council passed was that they would build their two lanes on their side of the street. It
would be two lanes, a center turn lane and then a south bound single lane which is already
road right of way. From where the blue line on Mr. Sale's drawing was to the property line
they are no longer building two lanes there they are transitioning back to essentially one
lane. So when they get to the property line instead of having the total build out at the
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 50
property line they have not built out a full lane of traffic. So it is on the diagonal. I think
that is the specific issue that Shari and Gary brought to our attention to begin with. Is that
correct?
Smith: That is correct.
Rountree: Their issue then is they don't want to require right of way from Don to put the
two lanes through there?
Smith: They are acquiring right of way from Don Brian they are just not building the
roadway section north of the Avest loop street (inaudible) south of the loop street they are
tying it back on a taper of what exists at the entrance to Mirage Meadows Subdivision
which is a I think it is a 52 foot, no,
Rountree: That would be four lanes.
Smith: Well, it is a 66 foot right of way.
Dolby: It is a 62 foot section transition into a 48 foot section.
Bentley: Well Gary did I pick up on something that maybe I am misreading into it but he
as talking about a fifth lane where he would have to cut in and acquire property all the way
down on the west side. That was where the fifth lane was going to be acquired from,
because that is what he was talking about taking in people's front yards.
Smith: Yes, well, their backyards, that was my question to him was could the section be
continued the full length of the Avest property that they are proposing to build along the
Fred Meyer side to the north boundary of the Avest property and then taper across the
intersection of Oakcrest which is the access into Mirage Meadows. That is when he said
it was possible they could taper it off down to Chateau Drive.
Bentley: But also he was talking about the existing homes that were on the west side of the
street because he was saying they would probably have to buy out a couple of the homes
when he was talking about the fifth lane also. Am I reading something wrong?
Smith: I don't recall the west side.
Morrow. I think the answer to that is when they made the second south bound lane on the
west side then you would have to buy some frontage from those lots that are bordering and
that portion became truly a five lane section at that time.
• 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 51
Smith: The only section of the roadway that is in question is that portion north of the loop
road where it ties into Locust Grove Road. The right of way is being dedicated by the plat
45 feet from the section line.
Morrow: The counselor raises a good point that the findings of fact and conclusions that
we adopted a year ago may very well discuss some of this same issue and they may be
requirements in that document. So that we would we need to research that also.
Corrie: For ACHD requirements you mean?
Morrow. No, the City, we may have stipulated in the findings of fact and conclusions that
the build out occur for those two full lanes and no taper. So I think what he is suggesting
is that until we research that there is not a lot we can do tonight until we find out what it is
we have to do.
Crookston: That is why I suggested I needed some time but I think we need to look at the
findings and the development agreement and particularly the findings as to whether or not
we said or asked them to do or told them and/or to do what the City desired that they
represented in their presentations to the City that they said they would do. We just need
to look at those documents.
Corrie: I still don't think that we have, (inaudible) do they?
Crookston: I don't know yet I have to look at the documents.
Corrie: Okay, we need to do that posthaste though because we are holding up a whole
center here.
Dolby: We don't really care what gets built out there we just need to know what to build.
In the alternative we need some relief from the City from a strict compliance with this
development agreement vis a vis these improvements when it comes to this certificate of
occupancy. If the location of the curve cannot be fixed mathematically very quickly we are
not going to be able to build it prior to our scheduled opening. So, if you need more time
to redefine and negotiate with the Highway District as far as what the program is out there
maybe there is an interim plan that we can follow where we just pave the approaches and
not fix the curve line until the ultimate width of the road is established and the building
program has been refined. But, really we need some direction from the City as to what you
want us to do and when it comes time to issue a CO we need some help.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I offer this, I don't think that the issue between the City of Meridian and
ACHD will impact you, I think that is the bigger issue. I think that the short term issue is
• 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 52
that the Council needs to research the Findings of Fact and conclusions of the
development agreement and find out what our working parameters are. I would suggest
this to you from my perspective as a Council member and I have no problem at all with this
CO that might be temporary in nature or might have some revision to address the issue.
So I don't perceive the resolution of this is going to hold up your opening from my
perspective.
Corrie: I am hearing the Council back here agreeing so I think under those circumstances
you don't have that problem.
Dolby: I appreciate that, and if there is anything we can do to help you resolve this with the
other agencies just give me a call.
Corrie: We will certainly be in contact with you on that. I will go back to Shari Stiles on
department reports since she was out getting a drink of water. Shari do you have anything
for the Council?
Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, we have two esteemed gentlemen here tonight wanting to
address the issue of Transport Truck and Trailer. One is John McCreedy who is
representing some opponents to the project and also Mr. Howell's attorney Steve
Bradbury. I believe they would like to take a minute or two and state their cases. I would
also like to add that for the annexation on the Bill Howell project we still need a correct
legal description before we can have an ordinance drawn up on that. I know it is kind of
irregular but I believe you have received the letters from Mr. McCreedy and Mr. Bradbury's
response. If they could address the Council maybe we can clear this up.
Corrie: Counsel I guess I will, do you want to go further with this?
Crookston: That is up to the Council, there is no requirement since they are not on the
agenda, but if the Council wants to do it then that is fine.
Corrie: Okay my question to Council?
Rountree: (Inaudible) I would suggest that we limit them to no more than five minutes a
piece.
Morrow. I have to ask the philosophical question here, why would be hearing these we
have already taken the necessary action. We have already been through the process
earlier this evening we asked for an annexation ordinance to be drawn. Obviously it is
subject to a proper legal description as Shari has brought up. So the issue is what is to be
gained?
• 0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 53
Corrie: It is the Council's pleasure it is not on the agenda or you can leave it.
Morrow. It is not subject to appeal.
Corrie: At this point it is not. The ordinance has been ordered to be drafted.
Morrow. I guess from my perspective given the late hour I am in agreement with Charlie
I think from a courtesy standpoint maybe a five minute presentation is in order. I hate to
see people spend literally four hours in a meeting and then not to do anything.
Corrie: Any disagreement from the. Council? You have five minutes for each one of you.
(End of Tape)
McCreedy: I represent Gary Voigt and Craig and Rebecca Groves and we did submit a
letter to the Council. My question is I attempted to make arrangements with Shari to get
this on the agenda, I understand there is probably a misunderstanding with her and that
may be my fault. But if it is not on tonight's agenda I would ask that the Council be willing
to put our request that you reconsider your decision on the next available agenda and that
we have an opportunity to debate that issue and get a decision from the Council on our
request for reconsideration. As I understand the ordering of the ordinance that is
tantamount to a denial of our request for a reconsideration. If that is it so be it but I would
like some clarification on that. If you are willing to reconsider the decision we think there
are ample grounds to do that very good grounds to do that. I did have an opportunity to
speak with two of the presidents of the homeowners associations that also testified to you,
Mr. Kevin Merrit and Mr. Mike Forgy. They both agreed with our analysis that they really
had no idea what the scope of the application was because it wasn't defined until six days
before the City Council hearing and they really didn't know what it was that they needed
to testify to to convince you they had problems with the proposal. So I think there is ample
opportunity for the Council to review that decision and I think correct some procedural
errors during it. Unless you are willing to put it on the agenda and unless you are willing
to reconsider that decision and consider the testimony and the evidence that we would
present I would agree with Councilman Morrow that there doesn't seem to be much point
and there is no need to waste everyone's time in that regard. So that is my request, would
you consider putting it on the next available agenda and would you consider an
opportunity to reconsider your decision. If the answer is no the ordinance goes forward.
Whatever appellate rights we have at this point we can exercise or not exercise and I will
advise my clients in that regard. But I agree let's not waste a lot of time debating a moot
point so I would ask that place it on an agenda and if it was my mistake in working with
Shari in trying to get that on tonight's agenda I apologize for that. I would formally request
that it be put on tonight's agenda and the reconsideration of that decision be had. I can
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 54
certainly go into the merits of it now and I put that at length in the letter that we put
together and submitted to the Council. The basic merits of our argument are persuasive
and it comes down to this. Six days prior to the hearing the application substantially
changed. Under your own ordinance 2.405 I, sub section 2, that is cause for remanding
it down to the Planning and Zoning Commission. That is not just an exercise in futility.
There is a real reason, people have an opportunity to understand what the proposal is and
then they have an opportunity to testify against it. Now I think the applicant would say the
change is all a reduction, it was all scaled down. There is a reduction in impacts to the
property owner and therefore there is no harm to that. There is no need to refile it, there
is no need to resubmit it and in addition they allege that they met with the Zoning
Administrator and that was her decision. I would encourage you to look at a couple of
pieces of evidence when you make you decision in that regard. The first is the application
that the applicant submitted. They describe the use as industrial and I have highlighted
and circled that and this is all in the record. They indicated that the proposed land use
again is industrial. Very thin application, very bare bones for a truck and trailer facility.
Again for the conditional use permit the proposal was for an industrial use compatible with
other industrial facilities in the area. It gets a recommendation of denial from the planning
and zoning commission and then six days prior to your hearing on December 13 and your
hearing was the 19th of December this information gets submitted. Substantial change in
the proposal and most specifically a change in the nature of the use. I have had an
opportunity to look at your ordinance a little more closely tonight and here we have a
description a narrative description that says well it is not proposed to be reduced from what
it was presented. This is the applicant's own writing, in addition we don't have the body
repair shop anymore, we don't have that industrial element anymore. We look at it now
and we see it is more like a commercial use than an industrial use. Therefore they are
proposing their own change in use from industrial to commercial. As I look at your
schedule of uses and the definition of industrial and commercial, I look very closely at the
examples of industrial uses listed under 2-409 C, the two that strike me as the most
significant are equipment, heavy farm etc, sales and repair. Well I think 18 wheel tractor
trailers fall within that definition. I look here and it says motor vehicle repair under other
type of industrial uses which I think falls within the category of uses proposed. So it is
clear to me that there wasn't a good understanding of what the nature of this use was and
they changed their proposed use from industrial to commercial. In fact as it stands right
now it may be classified wrong. It may in fact be an industrial use yet you approved it as
a commercial use. That is significant, I think under this zoning ordinance that you have,
even if the Zoning Administrator made the decision that it wasn't a substantial change I
read it as saying if there is a proposed change in use an actual change in the use
proposed by an applicant it shall be remanded to the Planning & Zoning Commission and
in my opinion that is mandatory. I think there was no choice but for the Council to do that.
So I would respectfully submit that it was err for you to consider that application that night
and that the better choice would have been to remand it back down so the folks who are
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 55
•
impacted by it can get this material, can develop quality arguments, can submit the right
type of evidence that they need to submit to preserve their appellate rights. As it stands
right now they wouldn't win if they decided to take this thing to district court. They didn't
have any idea what the proposal was. So they didn't know what to submit in opposition
to it. I think that is a very significant part of your ordinance that was overlooked at that
time. That would be the summary of our presentation if you were to reconsider it. Thank
you.
Corrie: Thank you, John. Steve?
Bradbury: Steve Bradbury, representing the applicant Bill Howell. I guess the first thing
I would like to do is suggest to you that you need not even reconsider this, take up the
reconsideration. I examined your ordinance today and it is possible that I missed it but I
couldn't find anywhere in there any procedure by which the City Council is permitted or
entitled to reconsider a decision that it made on December 19, some seven weeks ago.
After adopting findings of fact and conclusions of law over a month ago approving the
project. The 28 day time for an appeal to the District Court has passed since the adoption
of the findings of fact and conclusions of law. All you are going to be doing by taking this
matter up again is simply reopening what is otherwise a closed and completed action of
the City Council. So, procedurally I guess I would like to suggest that first of all you can
solve the problem and we can all go home by simply recognizing the fact that the
reconsideration ought not be considered at all. Because I am standing up here and we are
talking about a reconsideration I guess we can talk about whether or not it makes sense
to do it and whether or not there are any legal grounds, whether or not the opponents have
stated legal grounds why a reconsideration ought to be considered. I would like to point
out a couple of things that might sway your thinking in that respect. First of all the applicant
and his engineer made contact with representatives. Let me back up and start back here
first. The opponent Mr. Voigt was represented by both before the Planning and Zoning and
the City Council by a planning consultant who is still here tonight, Becky Bowcutt of Briggs
Engineering testified in opposition to the application on both occasions. Before the City
Council, those of you that are on the City Council at the time will recall I think and I have
reviewed the minutes of the meeting and have verified it to that extent never once raised
any objection whatsoever to the fact that the application had been reduced in scope and
size. Nor was there any objection made to the submittal of any additional information.
Now under the law of this State if you don't raise the issue before the governing board that
is you it is waived, it is no longer subject to appeal. I am talking law to you and you might
want to talk to the City Attorney and get his impression on my thinking in that respect but
I can certainly site cases if that is helpful. I guess in addition to that the, Mr. Roylance the
project engineer made contact with Mr. Voigt or attempted to make contact with Mr. Voigt
through Ms. Bowcutt and offered to provide Mr. Voigt with information about the project
and see to find ways to satisfy Mr. Voigt's concerns. A letter was directed to Mr. Voigt
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 56
seeking an opportunity to discuss the matter with him and through Ms. Bowcutt Mr.
Roylance was advised that Mr. Voigt not interested in talking to the applicant and his
representatives. Once again Mr. Voigt has not indicated any willingness to be apprised of
the situation and learn anything more about the application. I guess it is important for me
to also point out that the statute or your ordinance does in fact contain a very specific
provision and does contemplate that modifications to an application might be made during
the public hearing process. Mr. McCreedy has sited the portion of the ordinance to you
and what it says is that if there is going to be a modification than the applicant must go to
the Zoning Administrator makes a determination as to the materiality of the change and
whether it is a substantial change and if the Zoning Administrator determines that it is than
it is renoticed for additional public hearings. Well we did go to the Zoning Administrator
we discussed the proposed modifications the Zoning Administrator I think correctly
concluded that it was not a substantial change as defined in your ordinance and your
ordinance tells exactly what a substantial change is and talks about an increase in the size
of the project which this wasn't. It talks about a change in the use and I don't think that it
is a change in the use and I don't think Mr. McCreedy's arguments in that respect have any
Merrit whatsoever because as applied for it was a sales and service facility for a truck and
trailer dealership. As approved it is a sales and service facility for a truck and trailer
dealership. What happened was that the applicant withdrew the proposal for a potential
future expansion of an auto and paint shop, took it off the table and reduced the size of the
project by a significant amount. As defined in your ordinance it is not a material change.
Rountree: Mr. McCreedy I am going to interrupt now in fairness, or Mr. Bradbury, in
respect to Mr. McCreedy's presentation you are now at the limit.
Bradbury: I appreciate that and I wasn't timing Mr. McCreedy and I don't know. I guess
what I would like to suggest to you is that there is no reason for this matter to be
postponed any further. We are all here, we are here tonight, your impacting the applicant's
ability to acquire the property the uncertainty of the action is impacting his ability to acquire
the property. Putting it on a subsequent agenda only makes matters worse, heightens the
uncertainty, delays the applicant even further. I would like to suggest that if you intend to
reconsider the matter you do it now and not some time in the future. Better yet I suggest
that you simply decline the request for reconsideration and let the applicant move forward
and let the opponents pursue whatever legal recourse they have if any. Thank you
Corrie: Thank you Mr. Bradbury. Council, I guess we are going to put it back to you.
McCreedy: (Inaudible) The judicial deadline, the deadline for filing a petition for judicial
review may or may not have passed. But I want to make one thing perfectly clear. We are
fully aware of the ability to take this matter to District Court and that is something my client
does not want to do because he does not want to engage in litigation with the City of
0
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 57
Meridian, has a long standing cooperative relationship with that. We talked about that
issue that is something he is not interested in pursuing at this point. I just wanted to make
that clear.
Corrie: Counselor?
Crookston: Well I haven't considered any of these questions. I would have to look at the
record and see what was changed. I don't specifically recall the Planning Administrator
Shari Stiles determining that it was or was not a substantial change. I am not saying that
she did not do that, I am not myself recalling it, it has been some time. It is basically the
Council's decision but I think the Council needs some information on what did happen. I
cannot say right now, I cannot give you an opinion without looking at the record to tell you
what did happen.
Corrie: I guess it is in the Council's hands if you want to go ahead with the ordinance if you
do it stops it at that point. You made a decision I guess you can make a decision other
way if you so desire. Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: At this point I don't have any desire to reconsider.
Corrie: Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: I have no discussions.
Corrie: Mr. Tolsma?
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Corrie: Mr. Morrow?
Morrow: I have no desire to reconsider.
Corrie: Okay I guess it is going to stand that the ordinance be prepared by the City
Attorney with the correct legal description. At that I am going to, if there is anything further,
we need to go into Executive Session. So I will entertain a motion for the that.
Morrow. So moved
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to go into Executive session,
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 58
roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow - Yea, Bentley - Yea, Rountree - Yea, Tolsma - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move we come out of Executive Session.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma to come out of Executive
Session, all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: We are out of Executive session into regular session, for the record the Executive
Session conferred with the Chief of Police that his actions were correct and the request
the appeal of the termination was denied. I will entertain a motion, oh and the request that
all of your files be given to will to be put in the safe file. I will entertain a motion for
adjournment. Discussion?
Crookston: (Inaudible) approved the termination and denied the appeal.
Corrie: I thought that is what I said, we approved the decision of Chief of Police and denied
the appeal. I think that is what I said, I know that is what I said. We approved the decision
of the chief and denied the appeal.
Morrow: For safety sake I would so move that we approve the termination and deny the
appeal.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion is made and seconded all those in favor of the motion say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: That is all the business we need, I will entertain the motion for adjournment.
Bentley: I motion we adjourn.
•
Meridian City Council
February 6, 1996
Page 59
Rountree: Second
0
Corrie: Motion made and seconded we adjourn, all those in favor say aye? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:06 A.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
APPROVED:
O RT D. CORRIE, MAYOR
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., &TYktLERK
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1996 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JANUARY 16,1996: klproilQ
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JANUARY 23,1996:
1. PROCLAMATION: BURN AWARENESS WEEK: Rzexe-&d--
2. PROCLAMATION: ENGINEER'S WEEK:�-Le.�ewtea�
3. APA: TREASURE VALLEY ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS.-
4.
NALYSIS:4. ACHD: WIDTH IMPROVEMENT OF N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD AT FRED
MEYERS: ,arese e� b� Licrvy laze
5. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR
FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT, LOUNGE, AND MICRO -BREWERY BY
SANDPIPER RESTAURANTS: avprove /Xf
a prnvz e a se -
6.
e6. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST
FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
a�,Orore lF e/L ,hprvv,e decipv-;�_
7. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: ORDINANCE #718 - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3
SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION: approve.
8. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBD.
BY MARTY GOLDSMITH: u frrove
approve dgcTfi'p-�" � VA �a�,c.e_
9. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SALMON
RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
7zz6/e un t17 2o, / rl q6
10. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO.5 BY INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT:
approve w14 -A_ ccmd/��r
11. ORDINANCE #721 - ELLIOTT INDUSTRIAL CO. ANNEXATION:
R�1p!'OVPi
12. ORDINANCE #722 - HAVEN COVE NO. 6 SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION:
13. ORDINANCE #723 - DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FOR PARKS:
set P&blie 1/,eai-l" A- Aebl-aal-y 274 6) b,00Po,
14. FINAL PLAT: HAVEN COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 6, 5 LOTS, BY JOHN EDDY:
a4& C{rhi7? t26rctaty 2v /3-
15. FINAL PLAT: GEMTONE BUSINESS CENTER SUBDIVISION NO. 1, 1 LOT BY
GEMTONE INC.:
u�p�vve.
16. BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR PAISANO'S ITALIAN RESTAURANT:
17. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION FOR FILING OF THE FINAL PLAT FOR
HARTFORD SUBDIVISION:
Cpp"VCI 6n ee r ��c rLJi'e-•J
18. WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
appry vz
19. APPROVE BILLS:
lvllf
20. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
A. WAYNE CROOKSTON, CITY ATTORNEY:
1. BILL HOWELL ANNEXATION:
Cdy a t�erney v "pa Lt an dod4c
/3. /o&u /`h, ori vaJ
ap"oo-' f 6 /enrt ,be y � P d,
C"? -y a fin � 40 /.)'u'va'c..e aZ 4-;. u."C. AiL ea re^ eft
** TX CONFIRMATOREPORT **
AS OF FEB 07 A%:29 PAGE.01
CITY OF MERIDIAN
DATE TIME TO/FROM MODE MIN/SEC PGS CMD# STATUS
16 02/07 00:27 3891269 G3 --S 01'20" 002 132 OK
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1996 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD JANUARY 16,1996: 4pprvvf-
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JANUARY 23,1996: s4�p�ibre,
1. PROCLAMATION: BURN AWARENESS WEEK: fnes�
2. PROCLAMATION: ENGINEER'S WEEK: -' p,,eJe^&ou
3. APA: TREASURE VALLEY ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS:
4. ACRD: WIDTH IMPROVEMENT OF N. LOCUST GROVE ROAD AT FRED
MEYERS: ,orefejOeee h y Laevy saes
5. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST FOR
FULL SERVICE RESTAURANT, LOUNGE,ND MICRO -BREWERY BY
SANDPIPER RESTAURANTS: approve ��'%
crpPr�ve oru{•'ri��2 ufe
6. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING REQUEST
FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUBDIVISION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
ap,orore -11F-`c% appnvt a°ecITIr?-
7. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: ORDINANCE #718 - SALMON RAPIDS NO.3
SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION: afProv-
8. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 SUED.
BY MARTY GOLDSMITH: u,pprure-jC1,4- i c/l
appvove dQC%Sim � v�,i�n.C,e,
9. TABLED JANUARY 16,1996: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR SALMON
RAPIDS NO.3 SUBDMSION BY MARTY GOLDSMITH:
7`rub/.e Utt i7Z I2bhug ry Zo, / Q96
10. TABLED JANUARY 16, 1996: AMENDED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO.5 BY INTERWEST DEVELOPMENT:
ApProve wti'h CCMd/)Al.
11. ORDINANCE #721 - ELLIOTT INDUSTRIAL CO. ANNEXATION:
�o pvvti
12. ORDINANCE #722 - HAVEN COVE NO.6 SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION:
4PproJe,
CITY OF MERIDIAN*
PUBLIC MEETING SIGN-UP SHEET
NAME PHONE NUMBER
:tom„ I 3 - a-4-c4-
CITY OF MERIDIA
PUBL C MEETING SIGN-U SHEET
-0 9
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Robert D. Corrie
Mayor
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, Engineer's Week is sponsored by the Idaho Chapter of The American
Society of Heating Refrigerating and Air -Conditioning Engineers, the various chapters of the Idaho
Society of Professional Engineers, and National Society of Professional Engineers; and
WHEREAS, during this week the Idaho Chapter of ASHRAE will conduct special programs
in our schools, emphasizing engineering education and careers; and
WHEREAS, the Engineer's Week activities bring to the public's attention the importance of
the engineer's role in the technological growth of our nation; and
WHEREAS, it is appropriate to pay tribute to Idaho's and the nation's engineers for their
contributions toward developing and implementing scientific and technical advances, as well as their
leadership in establishing a high standard of moral and ethical conduct; and
WHEREAS, we can be proud of the contributions engineers have made toward the
development of industry, agriculture, communications, construction, medicine, high technology, and
higher education and to the key role engineering has played in these and other aspects of or society;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Robert D. Corrie, Mayor of the City of Meridian, do here by
Proclaim the Week of February 18 through February 24, 1996 as
ENGINEER'S WEEK
in Meridian and all the surrounding lands, and I urge all to recognize the contributions made by this
dedicated group of specially -trained citizens and commend and support them for their efforts to make
our great city, our great state and our nation a better place to live.
DATED this 6th day of February, 1996.
kRobertD. Corrie
Mayor
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
Robert D. Cor re
IVI fvi
PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, severe burn injuries are a leading cause of deaths and injuries in North America,
especially among young children;
WHEREAS, every year more than 2 million people suffer burn injuries of some kind, and
more than one of every three burn victims are children;
WHEREAS, approximately 75 percent of all burn injuries and deaths are preventable;
WHEREAS, the Shrine of North America operates three Shriners Burns Institutes, which
provide free medical care to severely burned children;
WHEREAS, the Shrine of North America and the Shriners Burns Institutes join with
other burn facilities across the nation in recognizing the seriousness of this hazard
and the urgent need to educate the public about burn prevention and fire safety;
WHEREAS, it is fitting and appropriate to acknowledge the contributions of the Shrine
of North America and to commend the Shriners for their continued support and
care for young burn victims;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Robert D. Corrie, Mayor of Meridian, do hereby proclaim the week
of February 4 - 10, 1996 as
BURN AWARENESS WEED
in Meridian and do encourage all of our citizens to support the Shriners Burns Institutes and to take
appropriate precautions to protect their families from devastating burn injuries.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and have affixed the Official Seal of Meridian on
this 6th day of February, 1996.
Robert D. Corrie, Mayor
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: FEBRUARY 6.1996
APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 18
REQUEST; WATER/SEWERITRASH DELINQUENCIES
AGENCY
COMMENTS
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
Y
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION;
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
DELINQUENCY FOR FEBRUARY
TURNOFF SCHEDULED FOR 02/14/96
Corrie: This is to inform you in writing, if you choose to, you have the right to
a pre -determination hearing at 7:30 P.M. , 02/06/96, before the Mayor and
City Council to appear in person to be judged on the facts and defend the claim made
by the City that your water, sewer and trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel.
This service will be discontinued on 02/14/96, unless payment is received in full.
Is there anyone present who wishes to contest their water, sewer and trash
delinquency? No response.
Corrie: They are hereby informed that they may appeal or have the decision of
the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court, pursuant to Idaho Code.
Even though they appeal, their water will be shut off. The amount of the turn off list
is $18,874.87.
DELINQUENCY LIST
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULED FOR 02/14/96
ACCOUNT #
NAME & ADDRESS
AMT. PAST DUE
1----20
THOMAS R. HAMMOND, OD
101.20
719 MERIDIAN ST.
1----30
JOHN R. BEAUDOIN
54.70
713 MERIDIAN ST.
1----74
KATHRYN CUNNINGHAM
55.90
118 W. BROADWAY AVE
1---170
RICHARD & K. LOYA
78.30
721 W. 3RD ST
1---750
RAYMOND HOPKINS
47.30
607 W. BROADWAY AVE
1---930
MICHAEL STILES
55.90
223 W. BROADWAY AVE
1--2010
RICK S. WISDOM
67.20
323 W. IDAHO AVE
1--2090
DONALD CANTRELL
61.70
736 W. IST ST
1--3130
ALLEN FLEMING
41.12
935 W. PINE AVE
1--3660
SHELLIE FARRAND
86.57
411 MERIDIAN RD.
1--3670
SHELLIE A. FARRAND
47.30
403 MERIDIAN ST
2----80
DALICE PLUMBING
91.50
921 W. 2ND ST
2---390
DANIEL LUKE
72.00
712 W. PINE AVE
2---466
WILLIAM & K. VICK
79.40
673 W. APPLEGATE ST
2---660
AUSTIN L. YOUNG
55.90
908 W. 10TH ST
2---670
AUSTIN L. YOUNG
64.10
916 W. 10TH ST
2---950
RITCHIE & S.GAYTHIWAITE
64.50
1442 W. STATE ST.
2---958
TINA HENDRICKSON
55.30
915 NW 14TH ST
2--1190
A. TERRELL
56.90
1324 W. 1 ST ST
2-1370
DEBRA LYNN WHITE
63.10
1607 W. 1 ST ST
2--1610
DENICE DESILET
65.20
1502 W. 2ND
2--1690
E. RALPH NASH
78.70
1616 W. 2ND ST
2--1870
LARRY PIPER
56.20
306 W. MAPLE AVE
2--1970
KERRY L. LARSON
150.10
225 W. MAPLE
2--2060
SCOTT FARMER
61.50
314 CAMELLIA AVE
2--2150
LOUIE J. NEAGLE
107.70
216 CHERRY AVE
2--2160
LISA O'DELL
50.60
224 CHERRY AVE
2--2180
DUWAIN SHEPARD
86.40
238 CHERRY AVE
2--2190
JOSHUA & I. THOMAS
61.80
312 W. CHERRY AVE
2--2280
RICHARD SCHERER
94.50
201 CHERRY AVE
2--2400
MARY LOUISE AGUIRRE
44.00
238 W. WASHINGTON AVE
2--2460
LISA L. COX
44.00
1230 W. 4TH ST
2--2602
MARK & C. HILDEBRANDT
76.50
1406 N. MIDTOWN ST
2--3120
DAVID KELLEY
85.60
1303 W. 7TH
2--3570
D. J. STANLEY
63.40
1122 W. 4TH ST
2--3600
WILLIAM HUTCHINGS
65.80
309 W. WASHINGTON AVE
2--3702
E.E. BRINEGAR
55.20
1635 MERIDIAN ST
2--3912
DONALD & C. COUCH
54.00
1121 MERIDIAN ST
• +r
2-4030
LEROY THOMSON
56.60
1204 W. 8TH ST
2-4520
PATRICIA R. WILLIAMS
61.50
1409 W. 13TH ST
2-4800
JUDY L. TODD
80.70
1400 NORTHGATE AVE
2--5410
SHERRI ELIADES
70.70
1434 ELM PLACE
2--5670
JAMES R. RANSOM
68.10
1017 W. 15TH AVE
2--5740
MONA NIMMO
59.90
1327 W. CARLTON ST
2--5850
PHILLIP A. DUPEROUZEL
63.10
1406 W. CARLTON ST
2--6020
RONALD GOODPASTER
84.20
1027 W. 12TH AVE
2--6030
TOM KRASOWSKI
67.80
1017 W. 12TH AVE
2--6440
FREDRICK J. SHADDICK
118.12
1002 W. WASHINGTON DR
2--6670
DAN FRASIER
92.50
1180 W. STATE ST
3----50
SHARON LYON
44.30
721 N.ABERNATHY WY
3----54
RICK FISHER
86.90
705 N.ABERNATHY WY
3---292
ROD & J. SHURTZ
59.00
2195 W. SNYDER DR
u
3---318
KIMERY DECKER
60.30
694 N. ABERNATHY WY
3---362
GREG & NANCY HONO
69.70
1903 W. SNYDER DR
3---370
HARVEY MARTIN
74.40
728 N. ROTAN AVE.
3---388
LESLIE BRUNTON
80.30
1968 W. SLATON DR
3---396
DONALD & T. DUKART
55.00
841 N. TALL PINE PL.
3---400
JAMES & L. ALLEN
62.60
795 N. TALL PINE PL.
3---412
RICHARD THURBER
62.10
635 N.TALL PINE PL.
3---420
RICHARD THURBER
66.42
674 N.TALL PINE PL.
3---426
GLENN JOHNSON HOMES
44.50
742 N. TALL PINE PL.
3---508
JAMES SANDERS
59.90
882 N.TALL PINE PL.
3---670
WAYNE MURRAY
77.00
1625 W. PINE AVE.
4--1412
RODNEY & M. PLUMLEY
73.20
2826 W. LEONARD CT
4--1646
BRETT & A. PIKE
62.90
2835 W. SHERYL ST.
4--1754
MARK PRYOR
68.40
2553 W. SHERYL ST.
4--1776
BUD LANSING
95.80
2628 W. WILLARD ST
4--1866
RICARDO & D. CORTEZ
85.30
1378 N. RUTLEDGE AVE.
4--1946
JOHN & D. MITCHELL
42.60
2188 W. SONOMA DR
4--2084
RONALD DOUTHIT
53.90
2298 W. SANTA CLARA DR.
5---168
JACK & C. KLAPWYK
49.60
3953 W. PARK CREEK DR
5---456
JAMES & K. MOORE
97.90
1390 N.DEEP CREEK WY
19---46
ROBERT MOWREY
50.60
3727 HARBOR POINT DR.
20--126
CRAIG & K. WALLACE
85.90
4345 W.WHITE ASH DR
20-1278
LOWE CORPORATION
42.00
1860 N.ARONMINK WY
20-1396
DAVID & M. OGILSVEE
69.10
3300 W.WOODMONT DR
20-1486
CHARLES HUFF
50.90
3552 W. TUPELO CT
20-1682
ROBERT STOTTS
52.70
3659 WOODMONT DR
20-1846
MICKEY L. WARE
81.52
3721 SEA ISLAND CT
20-1848
RONALD WILSON
49.20
2153 TURNBERRY CL.
20-1874
PAM WALKER
107.52
2024 INTERLACHEN WY
20-1880
JON D. ROHOLT
64.42
2050 INTERLACHEN WY
20-2006
DUKE ARNETT
56.00
3720 QUAKER RIDGE DR
20-2054
FREDRICK C. HUTH
118.00
3419 SUGAR CREEK DR
21---52
ROBERT BALDWIN
67.40
2088 LEANN WAY
21---56
DOUGLAS BARKER
46.00
2156 LEANN WAY
21---62
CINDY MCKAY
69.40
2246 LEANN WAY
21---66
ROBERT ATHAY
67.50
2288 LEANN WAY
21-1068
JOHN MURRAY
60.60
2748 W.WHITESTONE CT
21-1136
JEFF CLAVERIE
57.20
2415 N. MAXIE WY
21-1174
DAVID TWADDLE
78.00
2492 W. CHATEAU DR
21-1770
YVONNE DESIND
60.70
1941 MARIANNA PL.
21-1772
JON D. MANIER
97.74
1911 MARIANNA PL
21-1776
EARL FOREMAN
55.50
1920 TODD WAY
21-1868
DAREL D. PEDERSEN
70.10
2638 REBECCA WAY
21-1894
CLINTON BARNHART
94.40
2580 MISTY DRIVE
21-1920
KONNEL & K. PETERSON
59.20
2512 REBECCA WAY
21-2006
MARK & T. ROSE
70.10
1732 N. MORELLO AVE.
21-2724
CHRIS & K. OLSEN
100.20
2431 N. STONE PL.
21-2758
MICHAEL & B.THOMPSON
70.10
2444 N. VICTOR WY
21-2768
RICHARD THURBER
62.40
2566 N. VICTOR WY
21-2894
JAMIE MUNROE
68.30
2579 N. STONE PL
21-2920
KEVIN & B. CROFTS
209.40
2931 W. ELK STREAM ST
21-2990
HUBERT & A. PRICE
77.80
3133 W. MIRAGE CT
21-3036
GERALDINE BARR
81.80
2991 W. RAVENHURST ST
21-3068
PATRICK & J. BOYDSTUN
62.20
2943 W. JOUST ST
21-3086
PETER & L. COVINO
85.90
2926 W. RAVENHURST ST
21-3160
DOUGLAS & J. PETERSEN
58.20
3087 N. THAMES AVE
21-3296
DWAYNE & V. MORRISON
98.96
3037 N. HEARTH AVE
22--160
HOMES BY KIRK CONST.
50.30
1788 W.EMERALD FALLS DR
22--312
STEVEN M. CANTRELL
76.10
1750 W. CHATEAU DR
22--338
JEFF R. BURROUGHS
76.70
1861 TRACY CT
22--342
JOHN & S. FRY
90.90
1822 TRACY CT
22--914
JEAN RUCKER
96.60
2261 MONACO WAY
22--924
RONALD W. BENTZINGER
80.70
2135 MONACO WAY
22-1150
GARY HARRISON
96.50
2365 W.RAINWATER CT
22-1350
GAYLEN & S. COWGER
95.30
1956 W. MCGLINCHEY ST
22-1412
MARTIN DUARTE
68.10
1803 W. MCGLINCHEY ST
22-1414
RONNA MARTIN
85.60
1785 W. MCGLINCHEY ST
22-1420
DUANE DAVENPORT
53.90
1719 W. MCGLINCHEY ST
22-1484
CAROLE L. BRAWLEY
78.10
1701 SANDALWOOD DR
22-1524
CARL L. KOCH
62.50
1994 SANDALWOOD DR
9 •
22-1574
ROBERT D. TALBURT
58.70
1895 W. CHATEAU DR
22-1614
DONALD H. FISHER
62.80
1750 BEARDON CT
31---66
TEDDY KILDOW
.66.72
1250 W. CHERRY LN.
31--142
MARY VANDEVENTER
68.90
1330 W. YOST CT
31--608
MICHAEL WALKER
119.60
1333 NEWPORT DR
31--732
WILLIAM & S_PENDELTON
97.60
2132 NEWPORT DR
31--840
GERALD R. BARNOWSKI
114.60
1312 TANA DR.
31--866
VICKEE K. LARSON-POOLE
79.20
1328 W. CHATEAU AVE
31-1028
NANCY LOGUE
80.80
1341 DARRAH DR
31-2218
JOYCE GASKELL
45.70
2664 NW 13TH ST
31-2224
KIMBERLY SEUBERT
89.20
2724 NW 13TH ST
31-2226
A.JOHNSTON & A. HORNS
109.30
1321 CLAIRE ST.
31-2238
MARK TUBBS
80.40
1310 DARRAH DR
31-2262
ROBERT NOLAN
78.00
1494 DARRAH DR
31-2300
DOUGLAS S. HALLOCK
85.90
1532 LOWRY ST
31-2318
ROBERT EAGLE
90.55
1411 LOWRY ST
31-3002
DAVE CHRISTENSEN
88.70
2240 NW 15TH ST
31-3018
FORREST F. SCHUSTER
133.20
2218 NW 14TH ST
31-3032
KENT BARNEY
75.70
1321 W. CHATEAU AVE
31-3034
MARILYN EDWARDS
49.20
1311 W. CHATEAU AVE
31-3042
ALAN & J. BEAN
122.10
1089 W. CHATEAU DR
31-3046
MICKIE BUTLER
60.80
1081 W. CHATEAU DR
31-3050
DEBRA FRENCH
96.30
1065 W. CHATEAU DR
31-3058
DOROTHY L. HARBOUR
96.42
940 W. CHATEAU DR
31-3060
DAVID BASTIAN
127.10
960 W. CHATEAU DR
31-3242
DAVID E. MCGOWAN
96.20
2211 NW 11 TH ST
31-3294
ROD T. WERLE
94.30
1061 W. NEWPORT CT
31-3324
CHARLES AKE
58.40
971 DELMAR DR
31-3394
PHILIP R. CARROLL
75.70
1080 DELMAR DR
31-3406
MARY H. ULIN
94.75
1111 FAIRWOOD CT
31-3458
DARRYL HOPKINS
53.60
2048 NW 9TH PL
31-3560
DONALD FICKES
126.40
1016 STOREY AVE
31-3620
JOSEPH V. KIEBERT
92.90
941 STOREY AVE
32-446
WILLIAM A. CAVINESS
65.70
2054 NW 8TH ST
32-458
THOMAS DANIEL HORNE
62.42
2130 NW 8TH ST
32--508
BRIGITTE STONE
64.80
626 MCGLINCHEY AVE
32--568
MELVIN & D. FISHER
65.50
620 CRESTMONT CL.
32--586
LINDA L. PADDOCK
132.00
1717 CRESTMONT DR
32--656
H. LARUE BEVINGTON
81.30
467 CRANMER DR
32-=732
DELMAR GLASER
75.40
113 W.WILLOWBROOK DR
32--852
GREGORY BEEBE
79.40
567 W.WILLOWBROOK DR
32-1670
STEPHAN BUCKEY
44.00
201 W.WATERBURY DR
33-4344
MARK CIRELLI
54.50
2557 N.LARCHMONT AVE
34--342
RONALD & T. DARCO
89.20
1686 JERICHO RD
34--516
TOMORROWS HOPE SAT.
211.70
2154 N. SAPPHIRE PL
34--592
TODD & DANA ELLIS
67.80
2328 N. AMETHYST AVE
34--660
KAYLENE BAUER
68.40
2230 N. SAPPHIRE PL
34--812
KARL & L. KAUTZ
62.35
2298 NE 10TH AVE
34--942
JIM BECK
41.60
1553 E. HUNTER DR
34--994
DREW & V. MASON
51.30
2592 N. SHOVELER WY
34-1036
RONALD & M. LANDON
88.50
1288 E. HUNTER DR
34-1806
ERMINE DAVIS
88.30
1014 CLAYBOURNE DR
34-1854
WAYNE MCGURER
103.00
1011 CLAYBOURNE DR
34-1880
SHANNON JOHNSTON
72.40
2062 N. LARK PL
34-1976
MARJO LACROIX
81.90
1028 CLARENE ST
34-2104
HEIDI TYLER
76.40
1034 TAMMY ST
34-2128
JON KNIGHT
130.20
1025 CLARENE ST
34-2760
RICHARD THURBER
50.50
11.97 E.COUGAR CREEK DR
34-2802
BRETT & M. DUNSTAN
58.20
1316 E. RINGNECK CT
34-2860
BRUCE HARRIS CONST.
44.00
1252 E. STORMY DR
40---66
TIM & A. COCHELL
55.90
1926 E. SUMNIERPLACE CT
42-470
VERN & S. GILLOGLY
48.60
2579 E.GRAPEWOOD DR
42-1978
DAVID & S. MORSE
50.60
1810 E.MEADOW WOOD ST
42-2038
COMFORT ZONE HOMES
36.00
2305 E. CHATEAU DR
42-2102
STEPHEN WILLMORE
53.00
2286 N.WINGATE PL
42-2118
JIM & S. MILLER
74.70
2287 N.WINGATE PL
42-2252
BRAD L. MCKINLEY
86.90
2220 E. CHATEAU DR
42-2404
PHOEBE ROSE
50.60
2277 N.LOCHNESS WY
42-2496
LESLIE SIEMON
102.02
1961 E.GLENLOCH ST
42-2526
BONNIE WOOD
49.00
2400 N.LAUGHRIDGE AVE
42-2530
KELLY & T. KILER
73.70
2031 E. LOCHMEADOW CT
42-2558
BOBBY HOWE
88.00
2194 E. LOCHMEADOW CT
42-2582
LORRI CHAPMAN
63.80
2542 N.MEADOWGLEN PL
42-2712
JERRY B. KNAPP
76.00
2581 N. LAUGHRIDGE AVE
46--200
TERRY & SUSAN READ
44.00
3591 E. PRESIDENTIAL DR
50----2
TOM & R. ELLIOTT
120.10
16 E. PINE AVE
50---28
RONALD YANKE
132.90
930 E. 1 ST ST
50---34
HUBERT HOLLOWAY
130.70
127 E. STATE ST.
50---54
ROBERT BURKETT
50.90
221 E. STATE AVE
50---88
JAYNESUE DOWDY
60.80
934 E. 5TH ST
50--204
JERRY HOLLOWAY
71.40
416 E. STATE AVE
50-1198
WILLIAM GARDOSKI
64.50
1620 E. 2 1/2 ST
50-1308
APOSTOLIC BIBLE CHURCH
106.80
200 E.2 1/2 ST.
50-1330
MOHAMMAD ALIDJANI
157.70
200 E. CARLTON AVE
50-1368
WARN V. CULVER
58.50
1131 E. IST ST
50-1472
WHITE WATER SALOON
112.80
1646 MERIDIAN ST
50-1706
STEVE HUNT
87.90
16 E. WASHINGTON AVE
50-2042
JEFF REED INC.
44.00
1390 N. STONEHENGE WY
50-4226
R & M HOMES
63.90
1025 N. KILLDARE PL
50-4486
DAVID W. KETTLES
86.60
520 E. PINE AVE
51---50
AMYX FAMILY LIMITED
42.00
37 E. BROADWAY AVE
51--326
DAVID A. HAYMOND
44.00
318 E. BROADWAY AVE
51-482
RICHARD MURRAY
57.20
319 E. IDAHO AVE
51--714
JOHN M. HUMPHREYS
67.10
408 E. IDAHO AVE
51-3198
STEVEN RYKER
86.20
216 E. 3RD ST
51-3320
TIMOTHY P. ZIMMER
76.70
234 E. 2ND ST
51-3640
LOREN R. WHEELER
44.00
23 E. ADA AVE
51-3820
JEFFREY L. CHANCE
64.80
342 E. 3RD ST
52-1642
CASTNER/HON DEVELOP.
589.25
600 E. WATERTOWER LN.
68---20
DAREN & J. RIVADENEYRA
50.90
2419 S.RUBY RAPIDS PL.
68---46
JASON & L. JACOBSEN
50.88
1260 E. TIME ZONE DR.
69--566
LAWRENCE & D. CHURCH
68.10
1035 E. SHEPHERD ST
69--568
ROGER & S. JUDGE
57.20
1107 E. SHEPHERD ST
74---18
ALFRED & J. HOCKLEY
50.90
43 SW 7TH AVE
74---74
DALE HACKING
68.40
781 PENNWOOD ST
74---94
RANDY WINWOOD
121.90
671 PENNWOOD ST
74--350
GARY E. FRANK
84.30
638 HANOVER CT
74--354
MICHAEL & S. SAUNDERS
50.60
678 HANOVER CT
74-426
GLORIA LACY
50.30
623 BARRETT ST
74--798
HENKELS & MCCOY
169.00
513 W.FRANKLIN RD.
74-1006
UNIVERSAL WOOD PROD.
118.00
217 W. FRANKLIN RD.
74-1014
JERALD HOLLOWAY
132.40
64 ROSE CIRCLE
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: $18,874.87
NUMBER OF TURN OFFS: 246
74-2540
LONNIE GAMMEL
44.00
1207 W. KIMRA ST
74-2548
GORDON ROBERTS
44.00
1139 W. KIMRA ST
74-2614
MICHAEL MACKRILL
70.10
989 W. KIMRA ST
74-2638
CARMEN BIRD.
53.90
447 S. OUTFIELD WY
74-2694
WAYNE & S. HENDERSON
57.82
108 W. CRESTWOOD DR
74-2876
TRACY USSERY
87.90
1345 W. MERGANSER DR
74-3084
GARY PRICE
57.20
1112 W. LOON ST
74-3216
STEVEN & R. WILLACY
58.30
926 W.GREENHEAD ST
74-3248
RICHARD & K. GARNER
73.70
495 W. PELICAN WY
74-3250
ROBERT & F. PENNER
73.20
519 W. PELICAN WY
74-3296
ROB & C. BIENAPFL
47.30
404 S. CANVASBACK WY
74-3324
DAVID THOMPSON
56.20
1494 W. GREENHEAD DR
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE: $18,874.87
NUMBER OF TURN OFFS: 246
0 •
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: FEBRUARY 6 1996
APPLICANT:
REQUEST; DEPARTMENT REPORTS
AGENCY
CITY CLERK:
CITY ENGINEER:
CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR:
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY POLICE DEPT:
CITY FIRE DEPT:
CITY BUILDING DEPT:
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT:
MERIDIAN POST OFFICE:
ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT:
ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE:
CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH:
NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION;
SETTLERS IRRIGATION:
IDAHO POWER:
US WEST:
INTERMOUNTAIN GAS:
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION:
OTHER:
ITEM NUMBER; 20
COMMENTS
ASI Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian.
Meridian City Council
January 2, 1996
Page 4
ITEM #2: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR ANNEXATION AND
ZONING WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BILL HOWELL:
Kingsford: Council I understand just received those, what is your pleasure.
Corrie: Mr. Mayor we haven't received them yet.
Crookston: I gave them to Will, I think Will gave them to Shari.
Kingsford: They are going to be hot off the press is that correct. No doubt you have all
read those (inaudible).
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, could we have a couple minute recess so we can review these
quickly?
Kingsford: Is there a second?
Yerrington: Second
Kingsford: Moved by Walt, second by Max to recess for a couple minutes to review these
findings, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
FIVE MINUTE RECESS
Kingsford: Council members you have had a chance to review those findings, is there any
discussion?
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt and approve the findings of fact and
conclusions as written.
Yerrington: Second
Kingsford: Moved by Walt, second by Max to approve of the findings of fact and
conclusions of law as written, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow - Yea, Yerrington -Yea, Corrie - No, Tolsma - Yea
MOTION CARRIED: 3 Yeas, 1 No
• * 96011027
to E
ORDINANCE NO. 722
BME li3
/F Dz
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZOIJ G R AIN
REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF M% I1& Jim I
PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST
QUARTER, SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WST.r.._.BOIS
MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIV190'IDA'N.%
0
thence leaving said Easterly boundary and along said
Southerly boundary of Haven Cove No. 4 Subdivision North
88054142" West 230.58 feet (formerly North 89°20100"
West) to a point;
thence leaving said Southerly boundary South 01°05118"
West 100.00 feet to a point;
thence South 10012143" West 50.64 feet to a point;
thence South 00033112" West 100.00 feet to a point;
thence South 88054,42" East 240.01 feet to the point of
beginning.
is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and shall be zoned R-4
Residential; 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.
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 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 adopted
January 4, 1994.
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 into the
subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G, H 2, K,
L, M, and 11-9-606 b. 14 of the Revised and Compiled
Ordinances of the City of Meridian and other matters.
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.
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - HAVEN COVE NO. 6 Page 2
•
LJ
f. Meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law and meet the Ordinances of
the City of Meridian.
Section 3. That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of
the legal description, and map, which shall plainly and clearly
designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada
County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission
within ten (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.
PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this 6116 day of February,
1996.
APPROVED:
MAYOR -- ROBERT D. CORRIE
ATTEST:
_ BE, A .+
L'54 WIL AM G. BERG, JR. - ,CITY CLERK
j'� 1
C Lo
OUNT 00
11l1l1lrlll 1111►\\\\
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - HAVEN COVE NO. 6 Page 3
0 0
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 OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PORTION OF
THE WEST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER,
SECTION 11, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE."; passed as
Ordinance No. 722 by the City Council and Mayor of the City of
Meridian, on the day of February, 1996, as the same appears
in my office.
DATED this 6 day of February, 1996.
STATE OF IDAHO,)
ss.
County of Ada, )
City Clerk, City of (,A(,Eke,*
Ada County, Idaho Tho
SAIL _
-� T1s'
On this - day of February, 1996, before ''6; " he
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.
SEAL 1% ' 1' Not ry Pub is Idaho
LeG iding at M idian, Idaho
OC My Commission Expires N-29-2000
� CII �•OF
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - HAVEN COVE NO. 6 Page 4
9601102b
/22e-rrc6 �_ _
� r: k i
}. U►1YFV Er r�,. r�r.T:�
ORDINANCE NO. 721 $O15 c E J
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND. if ��N�A 21
REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF
OF LOT 6, PLEASANT VALLEY SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE OFFXCIAL
PLAT THEREOF, FILED IN BOOR 12 OF PLATS AT PAGE 665,F! n ,SDA
COUNTY, IDAHO, AND LYING IN THE NW 1/4, SECTION 8, Ffii: ,' R:'1
B.M., 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 parcel of land being a part of Lot 6, Pleasant Valley
Subdivision, according to the official plat thereof,
filed in Book 12 of Plats at Page 665, records of Ada
County, Idaho, and lying in the NW 1/4, Section 8, T.3
N., R.lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho and being more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing at a found 5/8" iron pin marking the North
Quarter Corner of said Section 8, T.3N. , R.M. , B.M., Ada
County, Idaho; thence along the north line of said
Section 8, T.U., R.1E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, N.
89059116" W. 1061.24 feet to a point, said point bears S.
89059116" E. 1591.39 feet from a found Brass Cap marking
the Section Corner common to said Sections 5-6-7 & 8,
T.3N., R.lE., B.M., Ada County, Idaho, said point also
being the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING;
thence leaving said north line of Section 8, S. 0030'24"
W. 40.84 feet to a set 5/8" iron pin on the southerly
right-of-way of U.S. Highway 30 (Fairview Avenue) and
also marking the Northeast Corner of that certain parcel
described under Instrument No. 9201051, records of Ada
County, Idaho;
thence continuing S. 0030124" W. 435.71 feet to a found
5/8" iron pin marking the Southeast Corner of that
certain parcel described under said Instrument No.
9201051;
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - BUTTE FENCE%ELLIOTT Page 1
thence N. 89041138" W. 99.99 feet (formerly 100.00 feet)
to a found 5/8" iron pin on the west line of said Lot 6,
Pleasant Valley Subdivision and marking the Southwest
Corner of that certain parcel described under said
Instrument No. 9201051;
thence N. 0030124" E. 435.96 feet along the said west
boundary of Lot 6, Pleasant Valley Subdivision to a found
5/8" iron pin on the said southerly right-of-way of U.S.
Highway 30 (Fairview Avenue) and marking the Northwest
Corner of that certain parcel described under Instrument
No. 9201051;
thence continuing N. 0°30124" E. 40.07 feet to a point on
the said north line of Section 8, said point bears S.
8905911611 E. 1491.40 feet from said Brass Cap marking the
Section Corner common to Sections 5-6-7 & 8, T.3N.,
R.1E., B.M., Ada County, Idaho;
thence along said north line of Section 8, S. 89°59,16"
E. 99.99 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 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 adopted
January 4, 1994.
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 into the
subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G 1., H,
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - BUTTE FENCE\ELLIOTT Page 2
F-1
CJ
K, L and M of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the
City of Meridian and other matters; that the property may
be de -annexed if the terms and conditions of the
Development Agreement are not satisfied.
d. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply
with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in
particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to
development time schedules and requirements, 11-9-605 M.
which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways.
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 and meet the Ordinances of
the City of Meridian.
Section 3. That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of
the legal description, and map, which shall plainly and clearly
designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada
County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission
within ten (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.
PASSED by the City Council and approved b the Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this day of February,
1996.
APPROVED:
41:RI -- ROBERT D. CORRIE
—
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG, -- CITY CLERK
t itrtttt`
®�:,�,'�
T; A L
����tttrrn rrrrr�'•`��
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - BUTTE FENCE\ELLIOTT Page 3
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 OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL
PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A PARCEL OF LAND BEING A PART OF LOT
6, PLEASANT VALLEY SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT
THEREOF, FILED IN BOOK 12 OF PLATS AT PAGE 665, RECORDS OF ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO, AND LYING IN THE NW 1/4, SECTION 8, T.3 N., R.1 E.,
B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE."; passed
as Ordinance No. 721 ,b the City Council and Mayor of the City
of Meridian, on the _day of February, 1996, as the same
appears in my office.
DATED „ thdjq,, (2-fk
9 0
�s7"is1. \
4
111111
STATE OF IDAHO,)
: ss.
County of Ada, )
day of February, 1996.
City Clerk, City of i4eredian
Ada County, Idaho
On this - 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.
Zi �
yA � � , I
mm� <<
SEAL ® �" N tary ublic f r daho
G q Re ng at Mer ian, Idaho
t
My Commission Expires y Zi-ecao
ZGUD
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - BUTTE FENCE\ELLIOTT Page 4
•
ORDINANCE NO. 718
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN
REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE
SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 19, 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 Southeast 1/4 of Section
19, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada
County, Idaho, described as follows:
Q 6 O 1 O 2 SCommencing at a found steel pin monumenting the Southeast
corner of said Section 19, thence along the Easterly line
of said Section 19, said Easterly line also being the
centerline of Locust Grove Road North 00°44149" East a
ADA ' I.;` VOROER distance of 2654.68 feet to a found 1" square bar
J. DA'.`F!'-V' RR0 monumenting the northeast corner of the Southeast 1/4 of
BOISE 1D said Section 19, thence continuing along said Easterly
line South 00°44'49" West a distance of 1007.41 feet to
1 the POINT OF BEGINNING.
'96 FEB 8 jn11'j2hence continuing along said Easterly line South
0°44'49" West a distance of 651.77 feet to a point,
f EEZ.. .�LLr,E
ST6Thence leaving said Easterly line South 89044'01" West a
distance of 524.54 feet to a set steel pin,
Thence North 89°04105" West a distance of 784.35 feet to
a set steel pin,
Thence North 00°29141" East (formerly North 00027152"
East) a distance of 791.20 feet to a set steel pin,
Thence North 89042100" East a distance of 166.27 feet to
a set steel pin,
Thence North 76055100" East a distance of 179.42 feet to
a set steel pin,
Thence North 83043'00" East a distance of 91.41 feet to
a set steel pin,
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - SALMON RAPIDS #3 Page 1
Thence South 38°30100" East a distance of 160.00 feet to
a set steel pin,
Thence North 51°30100" East a distance of 124.86 feet to
a set steel pin,
Thence South 38°30113" East a distance of 35.84 feet to
a set steel pin,
Thence North 51°30100" East a distance of 203.05 feet to
a point on the centerline of Eight Mile Lateral,
Thence along said centerline South 38029153" East a
distance of 340.81 feet to a point,
Thence leaving said centerline North 58034138" East a
distance of 152.73 feet to a set steel pin,
Thence Southeasterly along the arc of a circular curve to
the right a distance of 15.07 feet, said curve having a
radius of 20.00 feet, a central angle of 43°10119", a
chord bearing South 33054152" East, and a chord distance
of 14.72 feet to a set steel pin,
Thence Southeasterly along the arc of a circular curve to
the left a distance of 103.92 feet, said curve having a
radius of 50.00 feet, a central angle of 119005,07", a
chord bearing South 71052116" East, and a chord distance
of 86.20 feet to a set steel pin,
Thence South 41024150" East a distance of 33.87 feet to
a set steel pin,
Thence South 89015111" East a distance of 45.00 feet to
the POINT OF BEGINNING.
The above described tract of land contains 23.27 acres
more or less, subject to all existing easements and
rights-of-way.
is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4
Residential; 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.
Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de -
annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirements:
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - SALMON RAPIDS #3 Page 2
a. That the Applicant is required to connect to the Meridian
water and sewer 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 adopted
January 4, 1994.
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 the subdivision and
the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G 1, H 2, K, L and M of
the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City_ of
Meridian and other matters, and specifically that
planting strips be 20 feet wide and not part of street
right-of-way or utility easements.
d. That the Applicant shall obtain approval from the City
for all equipment, method and means to perform well
monitoring and shall perform the monitoring bi-weekly
during the month of April, May, June, July, August,
September and October.
e. That the Applicant shall approach adjacent land owners
and obtain permission to monitor their wells and that two
(2) such adjacent wells shall be monitored on the same
bi-weekly schedule.
f. That such monitoring shall continue until wells are no
longer used for pressurized irrigation and shall also be
addressed in the Development Agreement.
g. That surface water shall be used for pressurized
irrigation if possible.
h. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind
the applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns.
i. Meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law, except that the minimum
house size of 1,400 square feet shall be met and meet the
Ordinances of the City of Meridian.
j. That Applicant shall meet the development time
requirements of the City, enter into a development
agreement, and meet all of the Ordinances of the City of
Meridian.
Section 3. That if Applicant shall fail to meet the above
conditions the property shall be subject to de -annexation, which
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - SALMON RAPIDS #3 Page 3
• 0
conditions subsequent shall run with the land and also be personal
to the owner and Applicant.
Section 4. 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 5.
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.
PASSED by the City Council and approved by the Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this 64" day ofrj
��7FcccrP
1996.
APPROVED:
O -- ROBERT D. CORRIE
ATTEST:
WILLIAM G. BERG.. -- CITY CLERK
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - SALMON RAPIDS #3 Page 4
STATE OF IDAHO,)
. ss.
County of Ada, )
I, WILLIAM BERG, 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 SOUTHEAST 1/4
OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA
COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE", passed as
Ordinance No. 718 , by the City Council and Mayor of the City of
Meridian, on the day of 6!&Aa rN , 1996, as the same
appears in my office.
DATED thiR,,%t6tk+ody�r of
'\\ CT �G t��J}\ � ti ''♦r�� ,moi
STATE OF Ib�Fi'�
County of Ada'j,, L°M"��`,�,`�\\\
Fefhu��� 1996.
1 y Clerk, City of r' ian
Ada County, Idaho
On this &` day of ��ivarc� _ _ , 1996, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in andufor 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.
SEAL o
�� �'®Ow� qS�
q �n4
6i asN6
,��/111111 oo
otalPubliE for --Idaho
Res'ng at Meridian, Idaho
fission Expires:
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - SALMON RAPIDS #3 Page 5
BOOK 59 PA,:F 5654
-CORDS OF AOA COUNTY, IDAHOI
N 89'47'50' E 131622
C H I N A
S T A T E S
BOOK 35 PAGE 3016
S OF AOA COUNTY, IDAHO)
26.60 ACi
LEGEND E S T A T. E S
(BOOK 35 PAGE 3016
FOUND BRASS CAP RECORDS OF AGA COUNTY.iOAHO)
1
IF -OUND 1" SQUARE BAR
FOUND 1/2" STEEL PIN w/ CAP LS 4431
FOUND 5/8" STEEL PIN w/ CAP LS 4431 ROS 26548
SET 5/8" STEEL PIN
(N 89'56'41' W) RECORD DATA.
N\41'24 50' W
33 57'
N 89'15'11' W
45.00'
S 89'44'01' W
524 54'
CURVE TABLE
NE �ORNFR
SE , 4
SE' TION 9
(RECORD OF SUR'vt
W
N
f
N
10 FS
Lnr
N
2
N 89'57'31' E
:64.15'
h
n
r�: N 89'15'11' W
242.78' L"
= N
.. O
O
Z
bo
co 1p
In �o
t0 N
r Q
Q
W
i
Q
Q
ttFI1
�J
U
" 0
J
0
oj
i
19 23
SECTION CORNER
CPA6 NO 9241490
g1.41QOw W
S 53'431.
1� �O
76.55,.��
Z
5 179.42
S 89'42'00'
�� �06
g 105
166.27'
'$, oU
!c
'jdt
U N P
L A T T E D
c W
� v
fv
rN
8 O N
=C
.. Z cl
23.27 ACt
N 89'04'05' ov
784,35'
K A C H
I N A
LEGEND E S T A T. E S
(BOOK 35 PAGE 3016
FOUND BRASS CAP RECORDS OF AGA COUNTY.iOAHO)
1
IF -OUND 1" SQUARE BAR
FOUND 1/2" STEEL PIN w/ CAP LS 4431
FOUND 5/8" STEEL PIN w/ CAP LS 4431 ROS 26548
SET 5/8" STEEL PIN
(N 89'56'41' W) RECORD DATA.
N\41'24 50' W
33 57'
N 89'15'11' W
45.00'
S 89'44'01' W
524 54'
CURVE TABLE
NE �ORNFR
SE , 4
SE' TION 9
(RECORD OF SUR'vt
W
N
f
N
10 FS
Lnr
N
2
N 89'57'31' E
:64.15'
h
n
r�: N 89'15'11' W
242.78' L"
= N
.. O
O
Z
bo
co 1p
In �o
t0 N
r Q
Q
W
i
Q
Q
ttFI1
�J
U
" 0
J
0
oj
i
19 23
SECTION CORNER
CPA6 NO 9241490
• • ORIGINA!
BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
FARWEST DEVELOPERS
ANNEXATION AND ZONING
N 1/4 SW 1/4 OF SECTION 19, T.3 N., R.1 E., B.M.
MERIDIAN. IDAHO
AMENDED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The above entitled annexation and zoning application having
come on for consideration on August 15, 1995, and the City Council
having again considered the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
on October 17, 1995, at the hour of 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date,
at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho,
and the City Council having heard and taken oral and written
testimony and the Applicant appearing through a representative,
Marty Goldsmith, and having duly considered the matter, the
Meridian City Council makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of public hearing on the annexation and
zoning was published for two (2) consecutive weeks prior to the
said public hearing scheduled for August 15, 1995, the first
publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing;
that the matter was duly considered at the August 15, 1995,
hearing; that the public was given full opportunity to express
comments and submit evidence; and that copies of all notices were
made available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 1
0 •
2. That the property included in the application for
annexation and zoning is described in the application, and by this
reference is incorporated herein; that the property is
approximately 23.26 acres in size; it is in the Northeast 1/4 of
Southeast 1/4 of Section 19, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Ada
County, Idaho.
3. That the property is presently zoned by the County RT
(Rural Transition); that the Applicant has requested that the
property be zoned R-4 Residential.
4. The general area surrounding the property is used
agriculturally and residentially; that much of the residential
property in the area is zoned R-4 Residential with some of it
developed at less density than allowed in the R-4 zone; that Salmon
Rapids No. 1 and No. 2, which was previously annexed, is an R-4.
development, a housing size of 1,400 square feet.
5. That the property is adjacent and abutting to the present
City limits.
6. The Applicant, Marty Goldsmith, is the owner of record of
the property.
7. That the property included in the annexation and zoning
application is within the Area of Impact of the City of Meridian.
8. That the parcel of ground is included within the Meridian
Urban Service Planning Area as the Urban Service Planning Area is
defined in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
9. That the Application requests that the parcel be annexed
and zoned R-4 Residential; that the applicant indicated that the
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 2
0 •
intended development of the property is for single family dwellings
with a density of 3.4 dwelling units per acre; Applicant stated at
the hearing that for this phase No. 3 that the square footage was
1,400 and 1,500 square feet where the houses bounded Meridian
Greens within 500 feet.
10. That in the Rural Area section of the Comprehensive Plan,
Section 6.3, it does state that land in agricultural activity
should so remain in agricultural activity until urban services can
be provided.
11. That the property can be physically serviced with City
sewer; that there is a question in the mind of the City Engineer,
regarding water service and water service is contingent upon
positive results from a hydraulic analysis by the City's computer
model.
12. That the Eight Mile Irrigation Lateral traverses the site
in a southeast to northwest direction and is located within an 80 -
foot wide easement.
13. That there was no public testimony given at the hearing
before the Planning and Zoning Commission.
14. That Gene Schultz testified before the Council regarding
the type of fencing the developer had planned on using for the
boundary on the south side, between Rachina Estates and the
proposed subdivision.
15. That John Shipley testified bringing up the question as
to the location of the well house; that according to the map he
had, from May, it didn't show it; that it is suppose to be
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 3
somewhere on the 23 acres and by the looks of it ends up somewhere
in the middle of a cul-de-sac.
16. Marty Goldsmith testified at the Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing that the fencing would be of a non-combustible
type which is chain link with pickets in them that don't burn; that
some construction is being done to address the needs of some
residents; that some weeding can be done to knock down some
overgrowth; that the location of the well house is on Lot 14, Block
5, and that the street does go around it; that the lots in phase #3
of Salmon Rapids are not buildable until the extension of the sewer
is made to them (This language was suggested to be deleted by
McColl, but it is what Goldsmith stated and cannot be changed in
the Findings.); that he is working as to where which lots go where
and that the southwest corner will go to the Ten Mile Sewer and
that the other lots will go in the sewer main that is a little bit
closer; that he is trying to move ahead with the lot layout and his
intentions for serving those; that water is not a problem and
neither is the sewer.
Mr. Goldsmith testified at the City Council public hearing
that the well issues in Los Alamitos are applicable to Salmon
Rapids Subdivision also; that he can knock down some weeds; that in
response to Gary Smith's and the Mayor's concern regarding sewer,
he stated that there are some lots in the southwest corner of the
subdivision that are not buildable on until sewer is extended to
them; that sewer would be to the Ten Mile Sewer line.
17. That Gary Smith, Meridian City Engineer, testified that
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 4
the
sewer does not
have
enough depth in
Locust Grove
or through
this
subdivision in
order
to sewer those
lots; that the
land falls
away to the southwest where Ten Mile Drain; that these lots will
have to be sewered by an extension of the sewer main in Ten Mile
Creek or adjacent to Ten Mile Creek that comes through Meridian
Greens Subdivision; that until sewer line is extended through
Meridian Greens, through Rachina Estates along Ten Mile Creek, that
the lots are not buildable; that the development plans will not be
approved until the sewer is extended.
18. Walt Morrow stated that the 20 foot landscape strip along
Locust Grove Road, which the developer was instructed to move to an
appropriate place had not been done; that the developer had earlier
assured the City that this would be completed by August 15, 1995;
that the existing fence is falling down and property buyers within
the subdivision claimed the developer has sold them the 11 feet,
plus or minus, to add to their lot.
19. Meridian Police Department, Meridian Fire Department, the
Meridian City Engineer, Ada County Street Name Committee, the
Central District Health Department, Nampa Meridian Irrigation
District, Meridian School District, U. S. West and the Meridian
Planning Director, submitted comments and such are incorporated
herein as if set forth in full.
20. That the Meridian City Engineer's assistant, Bruce
Freckleton specifically commented as follows:
a. Any existing irrigation/drainage ditches crossing
the property to be included in this project, shall
be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605.M.; plans will
need to be approved by the appropriate
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 5
• 0
irrigation/drainage district, or lateral users
association, with written confirmation of said
approval submitted to the Public Works Department;
that no variances have been requested for tiling of
any ditches crossing this project;
b. Any existing domestic wells and/or septic systems
shall be removed from their domestic service per
City Ordinance Section 5-7-517; that wells may be
used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape
irrigation;
C. Determine the seasonal high groundwater elevation,
and submit a profile of the subsurface soil
conditions as prepared by a soil scientist with
street development plans;
d. That water service to this development is
contingent upon positive results from a hydraulic
analysis by computer model;
e. That a determination of ground water level and
subsurface soil conditions should be made.
f. Applicant will be responsible to construct the
sewer mains to and through this proposed
development via the existing mains installed in
prior phases of this development; manholes shall be
provided to keep the lines on the south and west
side of the centerline;
g. Applicant will be responsible to construct the
water mains to and through this proposed
development via existing mains installed in prior
phases of this development; that the well proposed
to be located in the No. 1 phase of this
subdivision needs to be in operation ahead of this
No. 2 phase development.
21. That Shari Stiles, Planning and Zoning Administrator
specifically commented stating as follows:
a. That any existing irrigation/drainage ditches
crossing the property, included in this project,
shall be tiled per City Ordinance 11-9-605; that a
variance for tiling of the Eight Mile Lateral was
granted in phase 1 provided the ditch is fenced
with a chain link or wrought iron fence on both
sides of the right-of-way;
b. That any existing domestic wells and/or septic
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 6
systems within this project shall be removed from
their domestic service except that the wells be
used for non-domestic purposes such as landscape
irrigation, per City Ordinance;
C. Adjacent residential property must be screened with
fencing as presented by developer during Phase 1
public hearings; perimeter fencing and fencing of
the Eight Mile Lateral is to be in place prior to
obtaining building permits for housing;
d. Submit protective covenants for subdivision in
accordance with City Ordinance Section 11-9-605.;
e. That the Applicant is to enter into a development
agreement as authorized by 11-2-416.L. and 11-2-
417.D.; that the Development Agreement shall
address, but not be limited to, the inclusion into
the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C.,
G., H.2., R. and L, and the goals expressed in the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan;
f. That the Applicant indicates a minimum house size
of 1,400 square feet; that Phase 1 development
agreement and restrictive covenants require a
minimum house size of 1,500 square feet;
g. That the Comprehensive Plan indicates that a school
and park site is needed in this section.
Shari Stiles further commented that a new plat was received
August 15, 1995; that she could see no significant major changes;
that with regard to the fence, the City has been making these
planting strip requirements and the idea is that there would be the
road right of way, 20 feet beyond that right of way which would be
maintained as a planting strip and then the fencing; that when the
fence was installed in this subdivision it was put up to match
Sportsman Pointe's which was only 10 feet from the right of way;
that Mr. Goldsmith told her that he is in the process of moving the
fence to where it should be; that her main concern with having that
fence within the 20 foot planting strip was that they would have
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 7
0 9
part of what would be homeowners owned property, then they would
also have a 20 foot utility easement, so in essence they would have
about 21 feet in the back of their property if the fence remained
where it was, which was all easement; that nothing could be built
there and they would have to stay back that far from the fence
line; that the developer has said he is in the process of moving
that fence to the edge -of the 20 foot landscape lot.
23. The Meridian School District submitted comments in prior
annexations in this area, that there is no excess capacity in the
schools of the District and that residents of the new subdivision
could not be assured of attending the neighborhood schools; the
School District asked for support for a development fee or a
transfer fee to help offset the costs of building additional
schools.
24. That the R-4, Residential District is described in the
Zoning Ordinance, 11-2-408 B. 3. as follows:
(R-4) LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT: The purpose of
the (R-4) District is to permit the establishment of low
density single-family dwellings, and to delineate those
areas where predominantly residential development has, or
is likely to occur in accord with the Comprehensive Plan
or the City, and to protect the integrity of residential
areas by prohibiting the intrusion of incompatible non-
residential uses. The (R-4) District allows for a
maximum of four ( 4 ) dwellings units per acre and requires
connection to the Municipal Water and Sewer systems of
the City of Meridian.;
that the R-4 zoning district requires a minimum of 1,400 square
feet to be included in houses in that zone; that in annexation the
City may, as a condition of annexation, require a higher minimum
house size than 1,400 square feet.
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 8
25. That the Applicant submitted an application for
preliminary plat along with the application for annexation and
zoning which application included a preliminary plat.
26. That the land is adjacent to the land annexed and being
developed as Salmon Rapids No. 1 & 2, which is now in the process
of development.
27. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use,
Residential Policies, 2.1U states as follows:
"Support a variety of residential categories (urban, rural,
single-family, multi -family, townhouses, apartments,
condominiums, etc.) for the purpose of providing the City with
a range of affordable housing opportunities."
28. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use,
Rural Areas, 6.3 c., it states as follows:
"Within the Urban Service Planning Area development may occur
in densities as low as 3 dwellings per acre if physical
connection is made to existing City of Meridian water and
sewer service and the property is platted and subdivided .
29. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Land Use,
Rural Areas, 6.4, it states as follows:
"Residential development is allowed in the rural area provided
that said development does not exceed the Rural Residential
Agricultural density, unless it is inside the Urban Service
Planning Area and City sewer and water is provided, then Low,
Medium and High density residential may be considered. All
residential development must also comply with the other
appropriate sections of this plan."
30. That the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, under Population,
Housing Policies, at page 66, it states as follows:
111.1 The City of Meridian intends to provide for a wide
diversity of housing types (single-family, modular, mobile
homes, multi -family, townhouses, apartments, condominiums."
"1.3 An open housing market for all persons, regardless of
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 9
0 •
race, sex, age, religion or ethnic background."
"1.4 The development of housing for all income groups close
to employment and shopping centers should be encouraged."
31. That there is a population influx into the City of
Meridian at the present time which has been going on for some time
and is continuing; that the land is relatively close to Meridian
and economic conditions are making it difficult to continue farming
in the area.
32. That in 1992 the Idaho State Legislature passed
amendments to the Local Planning Act, which in 67-6513 Idaho Code,
relating to subdivision ordinances, states as follows:
"Each such ordinance may provide for mitigation of the effects
of subdivision development on the ability of political
subdivisions of the state, including school districts, to
deliver services without compromising quality of service
delivery to current residents or imposing substantial
additional costs upon current residents to accommodate the
subdivision.";
that the City of Meridian is concerned with the increase in
population that is occurring and with its impact on the City being
able to provide fire, police, emergency health care, water, sewer,
parks and recreation services to its current residents and to those
moving into the City; the City is also concerned that the increase
in population is burdening the schools of the Meridian School
District which provide school service to current and future
residents of the City; that the City knows that the increase in
population does not sufficiently increase the tax base to offset
the cost of providing fire, police, emergency health care, water,
sewer, parks and recreation services; and the City knows that the
increase in population does not provide sufficient tax base to
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 10
Lu
•
provide for school services to current and future students.
33. That pursuant to the instruction, guidance, and direction
of the Idaho State Legislature, the City may impose either a
development fee or a transfer fee on residential property, which if
possible would be retroactive and apply to all residential lots in
the City, because of the imperilment to the health, welfare, and
safety of the citizens of the City of Meridian.
34. That Section 11-9-605 C states as follows:
"Right-of-way for pedestrian walkways in the middle of long
blocks may be required where necessary to obtain convenient
pedestrian circulation to schools, parks or shopping areas;
the pedestrian easement shall be at least ten feet (101)
wide."
35. That Section 11-9-605 G 1. states as follows:
"Planting strips shall be required to be placed next to
incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial
or industrial uses to screen the view from residential
properties. Such screening shall be a minimum of twenty feet
(201) wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right
of way or utility easement."
36. That Section 11-9-605 H 2. states as follows:
"Existing natural features which add value to residential
development and enhance the attractiveness of the community
(such as trees, watercourses, historic spots and similar
irreplaceable amenities) shall be preserved in the design of
the subdivision;"
37. That Section 11-9-605 R states as follows:
"The extent and location of lands designed for linear open
space corridors should be determined by natural features and,
to lesser extent, by man-made features such as utility
easements, transportation rights of way or water rights of
way. Landscaping, screening or lineal open space corridors
may be required for the protection of residential properties
from adjacent arterial streets, waterways, railroad rights of
way or other features. As improved areas (landscaped), semi -
improved areas (a landscaped pathway only), or unimproved
areas (left in a natural state), linear open space corridors
serve:
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 11
0 •
1. To preserve openness;
2. To interconnect park and open space systems within rights
of way for trails, walkways, bicycle ways;
3. To play a major role in conserving area scenic and
natural value, especially waterways, drainages and
natural habitat;
4. To buffer more intensive adjacent urban land uses;
5. To enhance local identification within the area due to
the internal linkages; and
6. To link residential neighborhoods, park areas and
recreation facilities."
38. That Section 11-9-605 L states as follows:
Bicycle and pedestrian pathways shall be encouraged within new
developments as part of the public right of way or as separate
easements so that an alternate transportation system (which is
distinct and separate from the automobile) can be provided
throughout the City Urban Service Planning Area. The
Commission and Council shall consider the Bicycle -Pedestrian
Design Manual for Ada County (as prepared by Ada• County
Highway District) when reviewing bicycle and pedestrian
pathway provisions within developments.
39. That proper notice was given as required by law and all
procedures before the Planning and Zoning Commission were given and
followed.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the procedural requirements of the Local
Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met, including the mailing of notice to owners of property
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's
property.
2. That the City of Meridian has authority to annex land
pursuant to 50-222, Idaho Code, and Section 11-2-417 of the Revised
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 12
I
and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that exercise of
the City's annexation authority is a Legislative function.
3. That the Planning and Zoning Commission has judged this
annexation and zoning application under Section 50-222, Idaho Code,
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, the Meridian City Ordinances, the
Meridian Comprehensive Plan, as amended, and the record submitted
to it and things of which it can take judicial notice.
4. That all notice and hearing requirements set forth in
Title 67, Chapter 65, Idaho Code, and the Ordinances of the City of
Meridian have been complied with.
5. That the Commission may take judicial notice of
government ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions
existing within the City and State.
6. That the land within the annexation is contiguous to the
present City limits of the City of Meridian, and the annexation
would not be a shoestring annexation.
7. That the annexation application has been initiated by the
Applicant with the consent of the titled owners and the annexation
is not upon the initiation of the City of Meridian.
8. That since the annexation and zoning of land is a
legislative function, the City has authority to place conditions
upon the annexation of land. Burt vs. The City of Idaho Falls, 105
Idaho 65, 665 P.D 1075 (1983).
9. 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
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 13
requirements, and 11-9-605 M. which pertains to the tiling of
ditches and waterways.
10. That the Applicant's property is in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan, and therefore the annexation and zoning
Application is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
11. That the requirements of the Meridian City Engineer's
office, including those specifically stated in its comments and
those stated herein in these Findings and Conclusions, and of the
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District, Meridian Fire Department, U.
S. West, and the comments of the Meridian Planning Director shall
be met and addressed in a development Agreement.
12. That all ditches, canals, and waterways, including the
Eight Mile Lateral, shall be tiled as a condition of annexation;
that a variance was granted for tiling of the Eight Mile Lateral in
Phase 1 provided the ditch is fenced with chain link or wrought
iron fence on both sides of the right-of-way and if not the
property shall be subject to de -annexation.
13. That the Applicant will be required to connect to
Meridian water and sewer and resolve how the water and sewer mains
will serve the land; that the development of the property shall be
subject to and controlled by the Subdivision and Development
Ordinance except as otherwise required herein; that, as a condition
of annexation, the Applicant shall be require#d to enter into a
development agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D;
that the development agreement shall address the inclusion into the
subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G 1, H 2, R, L, M
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 14
and the comments of the Planning Director, Shari Stiles; that since
Marty Goldsmith stated that Salmon Rapids has the same well issues
as Los Alamitos Subdivision, if the land has surface water rights,
those rights should be used for pressurized irrigation, and that
since Applicant is now using well water from one well for
pressurized irrigation in prior phases of this subdivision, and for
Los Alamitos Subdivision, it shall monitor its well, its use and
water level, to ascertain the impact of its use of well water for
pressurized irrigation on wells located on adjacent property; that
Applicant shall obtain approval from the City for all monitoring
equipment, method and means to perform the well monitoring; that
the monitoring shall be performed bi-weekly during the months of
April, May, June, July, August, September and October; that
Applicant shall approach two adjacent land owners, if possible, to
obtain permission to monitor their wells on the same bi-weekly
schedule; that the only proof that two adjacent land owners are not
willing to have their wells monitored shall be signed and notarized
affidavits from all lot owners adjacent to the subdivision that
they will not allow such monitoring; that two such adjacent wells
shall be monitored, but if two adjacent lot owners are not willing
to have their wells monitored Applicant shall request the City to
determine how the wells in the area shall then be monitored; that
this monitoring of the wells shall go on until wells are no longer
used for pressurized irrigation and shall also be addressed in the
Development Agreement; that the Applicant shall also annually
provide the well monitoring information to the State of Idaho,
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 15
Department of Water Resources, and have it determine, if possible,
the impacts on the ground water of Applicant's use of well water
for pressurized irrigation; Applicant shall have the Department of
Water Resources furnish the City a copy of their annual report;
Applicant shall pay all cost of the well monitoring and of the
Department of Water Resources.
That the development agreement shall, as a condition of
annexation, require that the Applicant, or if required, any
assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, pay, when
required, any impact, development, or transfer fee, adopted by the
City; that there shall be no annexation until the requirements of
this paragraph are met or, if necessary, the property shall be
subject to de -annexation and loss of City services, if the
requirements of this paragraph are not met.
14. That the house size requirements for the R-4 district of
1,400 square feet shall be followed and complied with, except if
the home is within 500 square feet of Meridians Greens Subdivision
then the minimum size house shall be 1,500 square feet; that homes
within 500 feet of Meridian Greens Subdivision shall have wood
shingle roofs; the Applicant shall extend the guard rail along
Locust Grove Road the number of feet recommended by the Ada County
Highway District (ACRD); that it was the understanding of the City
Council that ACHD would provide the materials for the guard rail
and inspect it; that Applicant shall provide the rail and Applicant
shall post a completion bond for 110% of the value of the work, as
determined by ACHD, to complete the guard rail.
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 16
•
15. That proper and adequate access to the property is
available and will have to be maintained; that access to and from
the adjacent property owners will have to be worked out and
included in the development agreement, or the property will not be
annexed or, if annexed, it will be de -annexed.
16. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind
the applicant, the titled owner, and his assigns.
17. With compliance of the conditions contained herein, the
annexation and zoning of R-4 Residential, with 1,400 square foot
minimum sized houses, would be in the best interest of the City of
Meridian.
18. That if these conditions of approval are not met the
property shall be subject to de -annexation.
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The Meridian City Council hereby adopts and approves these
Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL
COUNCILMAN MORROW
COUNCILMAN TOLSMA
COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE
COUNCILMAN BENTLEY
MAYOR CORRIE (TIE BREAKER)
DECISION
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED
VOTED tq,ltl
VOTED
The City Council of the City of Meridian hereby decides on
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 17
approval of the annexation and zoning as stated above for the
property described in the application with the conditions set forth
in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and those stated
herein, including that the minimum house size shall be 1,400 square
feet, except if the homes would be within 500 sgae feet of homes
in Meridian Greens Subdivision then the minimum size house shall be
1,500 square feet, that surface water shall be used for pressurized
irrigation, if possible, that Applicant shall extend the guard rail
along Locust Grove Road the number of feet recommended by the Ada
County Highway District (ACRD); that it was the understanding of
the City Council that ACHD would provide the materials for the
guard rail and inspect it; that Applicant shall provide the
and Applicant shal-� post a completion bond for 110% of the value of
the work to complete the guard rail; that Applicant shall meet the
provisions of the Conclusions of Law regarding monitoring of wells,
specifically comply with Section 11-9-605 G 1. regarding planting
strips being a minimum of twenty feet (201) wide and not be a part
of the street right of way or utility easement, tile all ditches,
canals and waterways, all as a condition of annexation and that the
Applicant meet all of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian,
specifically including the development time requirements and
entering into the required development agreement, and that if the
conditions are not met that the property be de -annexed.
MOTION:
APPROVED: DISAPPROVED:
SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3 - FF/CL Page 18
•
• ORIGINAL
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN
APPLICATION OF MARTY GOLDSMITH
FOR A VARIANCE TO THE 1000 FOOT BLOCK LENGTH REQUIREMENT
IN THE R-4 ZONE
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The above entitled variance request having come on for
consideration on November 21, 1995, at approximately 7:30 o'clock
p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Hall, 33 East Idaho Street,
Meridian, Idaho, and the City Council having heard and taken oral
and written testimony, the City Council of the City of Meridian
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That notice of the public hearing on the variance was
published for two consecutive weeks prior to the scheduled hearing
for November 21, 1995, the first publication of which was fifteen
(15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly
considered at the November 21, 1995, hearing; that copies of all
notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations.
2. That the notice of public hearing is required to be sent
to property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of
the land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E., 11-2-419 D., and
11-9-612 B. l.b. of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City
of Meridian; that this requirement has been met.
3. That the property is zoned R-4.
4. That the Applicant's application states that the
construction for Phase Two is planned for the near future; that
this variance is requested for Block 3 of Phase Three; that when
combined with Block 3 of Phase Two, Block 3 of Phase Three creates
a total block length of approximately 1400 feet along the Northeast
side of S. Velvet Falls Way; that we request a variance to allow
Block 3 of Phases Two and Three of the Salmon Rapids Subdivision to
be in excess of 1000 feet along S. Velvet Falls Way.
5. That at the public hearing the Applicant did not
initially specifically address what his application addressed, a
variance for the block along the Eight Mile lateral; Marty
Goldsmith, representing the Applicant, started talking about the
variance being next to Kachina Estates; that the block along the
Eight Mile Lateral is in excess of 1,000 feet, it being
approximately 1,400 feet long; that the block that abuts Kachina
Estates appears to be in excess of 2,400 feet, for which the
Applicant had not requested a variance.
6. That Section 11-9-605 E. of the Subdivision and
Development Ordinance states as follows:
"Every block shall be so designed as to provide two (2) tiers
of lots, except where lots back onto an arterial street,
natural feature or subdivision boundary; blocks shall not be
less than five Hundred feet (5001) nor more than one thousand
(1,0001) in length."
7. That the Applicant, Marty Goldsmith, testified
incorrectly since the variance applied for the area along the Eight
Mile Lateral, that the circumstances that surround this request for
a variance are that Kachina Estates surrounds Salmon Rapids and it
is a 5 acre subdivision; that the Ada County Highway District has
recognized and has asked that the Applicant not stub a street into
the 5 acre subdivision; that by stubbing a street into that block
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
VARIANCE SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3\GOLDSMITH PAGE 2
•
length the subdivision would have met the City's block length
requirement; that he has visited with the Fire Department and that
their only recommendation is that an adequate amount of fire
hydrants be installed.
8. That at the public hearing it was brought out that the
variance that was applied for was not the variance that Mr.
Goldsmith initially testified to; that with regard to the variance
for the block along the Eight Mile Lateral, he originally had two
(2) crossings of the Lateral; that ACHD's requirement was that only
one crossing be on the Eight Mile Lateral so the Applicant removed
one (1) crossing and that although the block lengths are broken up,
there isn't any exceeding 1000 feet.
9. That Councilman Morrow stated that he would like to see,
in writing, ACHD's requirement with regard to the Eight Mile
Lateral crossing and a determination be made with respect to the
exterior block and block length.
10. That there was discussion by the Council that the
subdivision butted up beside Kachina Estates, a five acre lot
subdivision; that because it was five acre per lot subdivision, it
would be very unlikely that those five acre lots would be re -
subdivided; that there was no need for streets going into a five
acre subdivision.
11. That the Central District Health Department, Meridian
Fire Department, Meridian Police Department and the Nampa &
Meridian Irrigation District have submitted comments and they are
incorporated herein; that the City Engineer made comments at the
public hearing; that Ada County Highway District and other
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
VARIANCE - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3\GOLDSMITH PAGE 3
•
governmental agencies may submit comments and they shall be
incorporated herein if submitted.
12. There was no testimony from the public either opposing or
approving of the Applications.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That all the procedural requirements of the. Local
Planning Act and of the Ordinances of the City of Meridian have
been met including the mailing of notice to owners of property
within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the Applicant's
property.
2. That the City has authority to grant variances pursuant
to Section 11-2-419 of the Zoning Ordinance and pursuant to Section
11-9-612 of the Development Ordinances.
3. That the City Council has judged this application by the
guidelines, standards, criteria, and policies contained in the
Zoning Ordinance and upon the record submitted to it and the things
upon which it may take judicial notice.
4. That the Council may take judicial notice of its own
proceedings, those of the Commission, governmental statutes,
ordinances, and policies, and of actual conditions existing within
the City and the State.
5. That the following provision of Section 11-2-419 A, of
the Zoning Ordinance is noted which is pertinent to the
Application:
11-2-419 A.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
VARIANCE - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3\GOLDSMITH PAGE 4
"The Council may authorize in specific cases a variance
from the terms of this Ordinance or from the Subdivision
and Development Ordinances as will not be contrary to the
public interest where, owing to special conditions, a
literal enforcement of the provisions of this Ordinance
would result in unnecessary hardship. No non -conforming
use of neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the
same district and no permitted or non -conforming use of
lands, structures or buildings in other districts shall
be considered grounds for issuance of a variance.
Variances shall be granted only where strict application
of the provisions of this Ordinance would result in
unnecessary hardship. A variance application does not go
to the Commission unless directed by the Council."
6. That it is concluded that since the subdivision abuts
Kachina Estates, a five (5) acre lot subdivision, there may be no
need for roads going into the subdivision but the Applicant needs
to apply for a variance for the block next to Kachina Estates.
7. That the variance for a block length greater than 1,000
feet for the block next to the Eight Mile Lateral has been applied
for and these Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law address that
variance application.
B. That the specific requirements regarding a variance
that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are as
follows:
11-2-419 C. FINDINGS
A variance shall not be granted unless (as a result of a
public hearing) the Council makes a statement of
supportive reasons based directly on the evidence
presented to it which supports conclusions that the
mentioned standards and conditions of this Ordinance have
been met by the applicant and unless all of the following
exist:
1. That there are such special circumstances or
conditions affecting the property that the strict
application of the provisions of this Ordinance would
clearly be impracticable or unreasonable;
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
VARIANCE - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3\GOLDSMITH PAGE 5
2. That strict compliance with the requirements of
this Ordinance would result in extraordinary
hardship to the owner, subdivider or developer
because of unusual topography, other physical
conditions or other conditions which are not self-
inflicted, or that these conditions will result in
inhibiting the achievements or the objectives of
this Ordinance;
3. That the granting of the specified variance
will not be detrimental to the public's welfare or
injurious to other property in the area in which
the property is situated;
4. That such variance will not have the effect of
altering the interest and purpose of this Ordinance
and the Meridian Comprehensive Plan.
9. That regarding Section 11-2-419 C it is specifically
concluded as follows:
a. That there are special circumstances or conditions
affecting the property that the strict application
of the provisions of the applicable ordinances
would clearly be unreasonable since the ACHD
requires that there can only one crossing of the
Eight Mile Lateral;
b. That the granting of the specified variance would not be
detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to other
property in the area in which the property is situated.
C. That such variance would not have the effect of
altering the interests and purposes of the block
length Ordinance or the Meridian Comprehensive
Plan.
10. That it is concluded the Application for a variance from
the 1,000 foot block length should be granted.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
VARIANCE - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3\GOLDSMITH PAGE 6
APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby adopt
and approves these Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
ROLL CALL:
COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTED
COUNCILMAN yHpjt5ENeT9N 13 EN7LE y VOTED
COUNCILMAN -E9RR3EE- RouA(TREE VOTED
COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED;r
MAYOR KINGSFORD (TIE BREAKER) VOTED
• -Apr. ._.--
DECISION
DISAPPROVED:
It is hereby decided that the variance requested, for a block
length greater than 1,000 feet along the Eight Mile Lateral as
shown on the preliminary plat, is granted.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
VARIANCE - SALMON RAPIDS NO. 3\GOLDSMITH PAGE 7
QEELQL6U
HUB OF TREASURE VALLE Y
co N01A1Fti!RFRC
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. GASS, Treasurer
A Good Place to Live
WALT W. MORROW, President
GARY D. SMITH, RE., City Engineer
BRUCE D.
CITY OF MERIDIAN
RONALD M.
CHARLES M. TOLSM EE
OUNTR
T,
STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
GLENN R. BENTLEY
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
33 EAST IDAHO
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
P
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
Phone (208) 888-4433 " FAX (208) 887-4813
& Z COMMIS. ION
W.L. "BILL' GORDON, Police Chief
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
TIM HEPPER
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 888-4443
JIM SHEARER
ROBERT D. CORRIE
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
Mayor
NOTICE OF SPECIAL WORKSHOP
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Meridian City Council and Planning & Zoning
Commission of the City of Meridian will hold a Special Workshop to discuss
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Amendments for the City of Meridian at City Hall, 33,
East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on Monday, February 5, 1996 at 6:00 P.M.
The public is welcome to attend.
DATED this 1 st day of February, 1996.
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., C C ERK
Alkeee ,014, Glu
Canoff/?i,�-," GCs t/s /�lr /&vle,
Mayor
NOTICE OF SPECIAL WORKSHOP
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Meridian City Council of the City of Meridian
will hold a Special Workshop to discuss Strategic Planning for the City of Meridian and an
Executive Session following (as per State Code for pending litigation, personnel matters
and/or possible real estate purchases) at City Hall, 33, East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on
Tuesday, January 23, 1996 at 7:30 P.M.
The public is welcome to attend.
DATED this 18th day of January, 1996.
C&
4<W Com'/
o ila.�o �e cufi�e s-2�Ss o�v --
Coyti•.�
7'- s X 5,,W hq t�) B i u fn o e # — ALe �4-pe�
60 10-15-11)
1:5( L 2e /.2k4�w�f
0 41
2EEMALS
HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY
COUNCIL MEMBERS
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk
JANICE L. GASH, City Treasurer
A Good Place to Live
WALT W. MORROW, President
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
CITY OF MERIDIAN
RONALD M.
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
OUNTR
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T. SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
GLENN R. BENTLEY
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
33 EAST, IDAHO
SHARI L. STILES, P & Z Administrator
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
PA Z COMMISSION
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
Phone (208) 888-4433 • FAX (208) 887-4813
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
W.L. -BILL" GORDON, Police Chief
Public Works/Building Department (208) 887-2211
TIM HEPPER
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
Motor Vehicle/Drivers License (208) 8884443
JIM SHEARER
GREG OSLUND
ROBERT D. CORRIE
MALCOLM MACCOY
Mayor
NOTICE OF SPECIAL WORKSHOP
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Meridian City Council of the City of Meridian
will hold a Special Workshop to discuss Strategic Planning for the City of Meridian and an
Executive Session following (as per State Code for pending litigation, personnel matters
and/or possible real estate purchases) at City Hall, 33, East Idaho, Meridian, Idaho, on
Tuesday, January 23, 1996 at 7:30 P.M.
The public is welcome to attend.
DATED this 18th day of January, 1996.
C&
4<W Com'/
o ila.�o �e cufi�e s-2�Ss o�v --
Coyti•.�
7'- s X 5,,W hq t�) B i u fn o e # — ALe �4-pe�
60 10-15-11)
1:5( L 2e /.2k4�w�f