Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996 12-17• • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF SPEICAL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996: (APPROVED) MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 10, 1996: (APPROVED) PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 1996: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO JANUARY 21, 1997) 2. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 1996: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHEVRON C-STORE, MCDONALDS WITH DRIVE THRU, AND A HOTEL BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO JANUARY 21, 1997) 3. ORDINANCE #748 - TAMURA/BERRY ANNEXATION - I-L ~ C-G: (APPROVED) 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY; TABLED DECEMBER 3,1996: (APPROVED) 5. AMENDED ORDINANCE #731 - OLSON-BUSH N0.2/I-L: (APPROVED) 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE FOR CARRIE OFFICE BUILDING BY JIM CARRIE: (APPROVE FINDINGS; DENY VARIANCE) 7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-C BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO JANUARY 7, 1997) 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR FIRST STREET PLAZA BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: (CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING TO JANUARY 7, 1997) • • 9. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ANEW/USED R.V. SALES/ SERVICE FACILITY BY ZAMZOWS: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE NEW FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW) 10. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY BY WESTERN PCS II CORP.: (APROVE FINDINGS; APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT) 11. MARTY GOLDSMITH: DISCUSSION OF SALMON RAPIDS PHASE 3: (CONTINUE DISCUSSION TO JANUARY 21, 1997 MEETING) 12. MOUNTAIN VIEW EQUIPMENT COMPANY: REQUEST HOOK UP TO CITY WATER AT 700 W. OVERLAND ROAD: (TABLED UNTIL JANUARY 7, 1997 MEETING) 13. LAND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH L.J. RANCHES: (APPROVED) 14. RENEWAL OF BEER/WINE/LIQUOR LICENSES FOR 1997: (APPROVED) 15. BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR WEBAIR LLC: {APPROVED) 16. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER: 1. STATUS OF ALBERTSON/LOVAN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR WATER/SEWER LINE: 2. WELL NO. 9 REHAB: (APPROVED) 3. TULLY PARK DESIGN: B. WAYNE CROOKSTON, CITY ATTORNEY: 1. OFFICE SPACE AGREEMENT: (APPROVED) C. GLENN BENTLEY, CITY COUNCILMAN:. 1. FORCED ANNEXATIONS: D. CHARLIE ROUNTREE, CITY COUNCILMAN: 1. PARKS COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS: (APPROVED) E. MAYOR CORRIE: 1. HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS: (APPROVED) D. WILL BERG, CITY CLERK: 1. ICRMP LETTER: 2. SUPPORT FOR WARRJOR STADIUM: (APPROVED) ~ ~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 17. 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, Charlie Rountree, Ron Tolsma: OTHERS PRESENT: Will Berg, Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Shari Stiles, Chief Bill Gordon, Richard Williams, Steve Brown, Steve Bradbury, Rick Zamzow, Dave Wiltsee, Brian McColl, Stan McHutchinson, Paul Wilhelm, Joy Snider, Kevyn Welch, Barry Jenkins, Boy Scout Troop #79, Robert Browning: MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996: Corrie: First I would like to welcome the leaders and scouts of Troop #69 here this evening, glad to have you fellahs here. If you have any questions afterwards or sometime let us know we have to answer them for you. Council you have the minutes for the previous meeting held December 3, 1996, entertain a motion for their acceptance if you so desire. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move we approve the minutes of the meeting held December 3, 1996. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to accept the minutes of the regular meeting held December 3, 1996, any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996: Corrie: Entertain a motion on that one. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move we accept the minutes as written for the December 3, 1996 meeting. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley that we accept the special meeting minutes held December 3, 1996, second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 2 MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 10, 1996: Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that we accept the minutes of the special meeting of December 10, 1996. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma to accept the minutes of the special meeting held December 10, 1996, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #1: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 1996: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: Corrie: I will continue the public hearing, is there anybody from the public that would like to, well first Eagte Partners that would like to testify at this time? Anybody from the public that would like to? Mr. Williams Richard Williams, 3133 Autumn Way, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Williams: Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, I would like to (inaudible). We have gone over this thing a number of times, I don't want to belabor the points. The document that you have in front of you outlines what we feel our problems with this development problems as they deal with the comprehensive plan. Specifically, I would just like to address the fact that in terms of your comprehensive plan into a transition area where you are transitioning between residential, what we feel is high quality residential in commercial that this really does not fit the criteria in any way, shape or form. A six foot high wall concrete wall does not provide a buffer or a transition at all. We feel very strongly that this development as it has been presented if it is approved will have serious degradation of the neighborhood, does not comply with the comprehensive plan in terms of transition. And is in an area where mixed use would be more acceptable in terms of an office type of development or something of that nature that would in fact provide a true transition from commercial to residential. This does not meet those criteria set out in the plan at all. We do ask that you do reject this plan, this application. Quite frankly we feel for the betterment of the City of Meridian. We hope that you feel you have an obligation to provide some protection to existing neighborhoods. This would not provide that protection, it would not enhance the quality of life, it would not enhance the quality of Meridian, it would not enhance the quality of our neighborhood. In terms of that document I would ask that you look it over, we do want that entered into the public record. That is really, in order for ~ ~ Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 3 brevity, I know you have a long agenda tonight, and we don't want you to be here any longer than you have to. So if you have any questions I would be glad to answer them. Corrie: Thank you Mr. Williams, any questions from Council? Anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony at this time? We do have a letter from Billy Ray Strite Steve Brown, 707 N. 8th Street, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney. Brown: Two points I would like to make, the first is that it is possible and reasonable and within the contemplation of the comprehensive plan that there can be a use of a commercial nature of (inaudible) contained in this application within the vicinity of a residential neighborhood. It is not unusual to see it and this project has been designed with the thought in mind of buffering and trying to minimize the impact on the neighborhood to the north. In particular the more intensive use, Chevron, the McDonalds, is at the south end of the project, away from the neighborhood. The hotel is oriented so that there are no windows facing the neighborhood overlooking the neighborhood. There is a berm, a 30 foot setback, there is approximately 200 feet from the back of the houses to the first building that this project would have. That is the first point that we think it can be made compatible that it has been designed to be compatible: The second point- is that the comprehensive plan and in the zoning map, the proposed zoning map that goes along with the area of impact for the comprehensive plan does designate this as a commercial area. It is one of the major intersections in the County, frankly, we have a State highway going north and south, we have I-84 east and west. I think it is not only anticipated but it is logical that the types of services and business that are going to serve travelers be located at this site. We would request on behalf of the Eagle Partners that the Council would proceed to approve the project. Thank you. Corrie: Any questions from Council? Rountree: Mr. Mayor, you indicated that you had a proposed motel site, no windows would be on the north side, what is the likelihood of that motel and give me some specifics. Brown: The likelihood? Rountree: Of that occurring. Brown: The likelihood of it occurring is it is part of the plan that we have asked the Council to approve and it is part of the plan that was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. It does include the hotel and if the project is approved it will be built. Rountree: What would be the timing of it? Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 4 Brown: I think there was some discussion about that earlier, it will be built. It is going to take longer to build the hotel than it will the Chevron and McDonalds. I think it will be finished and occupied later but we would expect that it would start at approximately the same time. Come: Anyone else from the public that would like to enter testimony at this time? I have a letter from the architects Billy Ray Strite, I would like to have the City Clerk read that into the testimony tonight. Berg: We received this letter via fax and also hand delivered this afternoon. It is from BRS Architects addressed to Robert Corrie, Mayor and City Council. Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council, I will be out of town on family business the night of December 17, 1996 the prescribed continuance for the above project and offer if appropriate the following testimony for the record. As per my earlier testimony I will attempt to make this brief and I strongly believe the recommended findings are accurate and appropriate. We are confident that when someone chooses to buy a home adjacent to or has a and interchange constructed in close proximity to their neighborhood there is going to be an impact. The tremendous increase in traffic will have a profound effect on the nearby land uses. Your comprehensive plan recognizes that transitional areas and identifies them more appropriate intense uses. The question then is how can the real and perceived impacts be mitigated or minimized by the proposed development. Traditional land planning would suggest that multi-family residential provides the buffer between single family residential and more intense commercial uses. This application in our opinion provides a similar buffer but without 24 residence. Similarly this use is some 250 feet from the nearest resident or 2/3 of a City block. Couple this with the 35 foot wide raised landscape berm and it is obvious that the applicant recognize the potential for impact and has addressed it. They have also proposed a hotel without windows on the north elevation to minimize visual intrudance to the adjacent well screened yards. The ACRD ,road issue whether decided or not at the time of this writing in our opinion has little to do with this application as it relates to the land use or the potential to buffer this project. The applicant as with neighbors does not want this roadway, but have modified their plan without sacrificing the proposed buffer. I am sure there will be more emotional testimony all of which will be with good intent. However, testimony will not change the physical presence of the interchange and the highest and best use of the land uses adjacent to it. In closing we appreciate the opportunity provided us and ask the Commission's recommendation accept as previously discussed be approved. Thank you, as always BRS Architects, Billy Ray Strite. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, have we received as of yet, there is nothing in my packet that indicates we have got the information from ACHD with respect to their findings concerning the road, Shari is shaking her head can we have her address that please? Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 5 Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mr. Mayor and Council, I talked to Larry Sale at Ada County Highway District last Friday. He indicated they had deferred it to January 8, 1997. That would be the earliest possible time they would look at it again. Morrow: Thank you, Mr. Mayor if there is no other public testimony I think that I would be interested in continuing this until January 21, 1997 so that we may have as part of the record the ACHD findings. I believe that they are an important part of the record and that they (inaudible). Corrie: Any other comment from Council? Rountree: I agree, I think the only thing that I would add is that if we defer until the most appropriate date which might be January 21, in that time could we not have draft findings in the preparation process that would include ACHD's comments so that the draft that we might see January 21 or thereabouts at least be .pulled together? Morrow: I think that we could but I think that if we continue the public hearing certainly that would lend the opportunity (inaudible) public record. Rountree: I agree. Morrow: It seems to me like in the interest of efficiency (inaudible) it seems to me that we continue the public hearing to the 21st and then call for findings based on any testimony that (inaudible) Corrie: I will entertain a motion to that effect if you so desire. Crookston: I think we need to ask if there is any more public testimony. Corrie: Is there anybody else that would like to enter testimony at this time? Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we continue the public hearing for the request for annexation and zoning to C-G by Eagle Partners LLC to January 21, 1997. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree; to continue the public hearing until January 21, 1997, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 6 ITEM #2: PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 1996: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHEVRON C-STORE, MCDONALDS WITH DRIVE THRU, AND A HOTEL BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the members of the Eagle Partners LLC if they would like to testify at this time. Anybody from the public that would like to enter testimony at this time? Richard Williams, 3133 Autumn Way, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney. Williams: I would just like to reiterate that the document that I presented at the initial public hearing for the annexation be entered into the public record on the conditional use permit. Corrie: Thank you, any further testimony on this conditional use permit for the public? Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we continue the public hearing for the request for the conditional use permit for a Chevron C Store, McDonalds with drive thru and hotel by Eagle Partners LLC to January 21, 1997. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to continue the public hearing on the conditional use permit for the Chevron C-Store, McDonalds with drive thru and hotel until January 21, 1997. Any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #3: ORDINANCE #748 - TAMURA/BERRY ANNEXATION I-L & C-G: Cowie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS THEE 1/2 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 OF SECTION 7, A PORTION OF THEW 1/2 OF SW 114, 1/4 OF SECTION 8 T.3N, R.1 E, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the public who would like to have Ordinance #748 read in its entirety? Hearing none, Council you have that ordinance in your possession, I will entertain a motion. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt Ordinance #748 with the suspension of rules. Bentley: Second Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 7 Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley, that we adopt ordinance #748 with suspension of rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #4: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY; TABLED DECEMBER 3, 1996: Corrie: We had to wait until we got the ordinance (inaudible) Morrow: Unless the Council doesn't have a comfort level, I think as I recollect the findings as prepared for P & Z were appropriate and I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions as prepared for P & Z. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that we approve the preparation of the findings of fact and conclusions of law on the conditional use permit, excuse me, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Now we need a motion to approve the conditional use. Rountree: So moved Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the findings, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #5: AMENDED ORDINANCE #731 - OLSON BUSH NO. 2/I-L: Corrie: That was a correction if I am not mistaken Mr. Counselor that we had some, to Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 8 make sure that it all came together at one time and one place, is that correct? Crookston: That is correct, the legal description that was initially provided the City did not close. The reason for the change is to have a legal description that closes the property. That is the only reason for the amended ordinance. Corrie: Amended Ordinance #731, 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 8, T.3N, R.1 E, B.M., ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to have amended ordinance #731 read in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion for acceptance of Amended Ordinance #731. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would have a question for Gary Smith. On the Olson Bush property description did that finally close? Smith: Yes sir. Rountree: Mr. Mayor I would move that we adopt Ordinance #731 with suspension of rules. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve amended ordinance #731 with suspension of rules, roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #6: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS QF LAW FOR VARIANCE FOR CARRIE OFFICE BUILDING BY JIM CARRIE: Corrie: Council you have those findings. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, for the sake of clarity, there was a set of findings in our packet that .had some incorrect areas in them. Counselor did just prior to the start of the meeting did pass out a set of new findings with those items corrected. I think that what I would like to do is make a motion that we hereby approve and adopt the amended findings of fact and conclusions of law if that is appropriate. • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 9 Crookston: They are not amended, they are changed but they are not amended because they were never adopted. So they are not amended findings. Morrow: Well would you be more comfortable then if I set number 2 or something like that so that there is no confusion as to which ones we were adopting. Crookston: Well is set number two (inaudible) Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would like to rephrase my motion to adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the Counselor in the final version. Tolsma: Second Cowie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the findings of fact and contusions of law as adopted as the final version you have in front of you, any further discussion? Roll call vote ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Tolsma -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Bentley -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Cowie: Entertain a motion on the decision. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, it is decided the application for a variance from 11-2-410 A, 11-9-605 B the 35 landscape strip should not be granted to the applicant and the application is denied. Rountree: Second Cowie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree that the decision as read, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #7: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-C BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: Cowie: At this time I will open the public hearing and Council you have received a letter, did you all receive the letter from Chutc Christianson the engineer, asking that the public hearing for this project be continued to January 7? Is there anybody from the public that would like to enter testimony tonight on this request for annexation? Hearing none, Council • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 10 I will keep it open and request (inaudible) ~J Morrow: Mr Mayor, I would move that we continue the public hearing on the preliminary final plat for First Street Plaza by Cherry Plaza Associates to January 7, 1997. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to continue the public hearing for annexation and zoning of Cherry Plaza Associates to January 7, 1997, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #8: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR FIRST STREET PLAZA BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: Corrie: Is there anybody that would like to enter testimony at this time? Hearing none I will entertain a motion from Council. Bentley: So moved to table to January 7. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Rountree that the public hearing be continued to January 7, 1997. Any further discussion? Hearing none all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #9: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ANEW/USED R.V. SALES/SERVICE FACILITY BY ZAMZOWS: Corrie: Is there a representative from Zamzows here that would like to give us some information? Bradbury: Thank you Mr. Mayor and members of the Council, my name is Steve Bradbury, I am an attorney, my office is at 300 N. 6th Street, I have been asked to represent Zamzows in connection with this application tonight. As you I think you folks probably know and understand what the application seeks is an expansion of an existing conditional use permit for a new and used recreational vehicle sales and service facility that is located over at the former site of the Meridian Ford dealership on East First Street. So that you can • • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 11 get an idea of the property that we are talking about, it is bounded by East First Street on the East, by Meridian Road on the West and by Les Schwab tires on the South. It consists of approximately 3 acres. So that there is no confusion about it this is not the entire site that Meridian Ford occupied as I understand it. It is just the more southerly portion of it. I guess a portion of that property was leased by those folks and Zamzows did not acquire that. This property is now owned by Zamzows and is being leased to Tom Scott Automotive and of course anybody that drives by there has seen what is on the property. It is generally recreational vehicles and some other sorts of vehicles, certain types. The original conditional use permit application was filed last March in 1996 for somebody called Advantage Auto Sales. That was going to be an automobile and truck sales lot. That portion of the site at that time (inaudible) consisted of only a little over an acre I guess and it was on the SE corner of the property. That application was heard of course by the Planning and Zoning Commission, was approved subject to a number of conditions including the preparation of the landscaping plan and other issues similar. While working on those conditions Advantage Auto apparently changed its plans and abandoned the project and went away. Last Summer then Zamzows filed. an application to transfer that conditional use permit the one that was issued to Advantage Auto to Tom Scott Automotive and you folks approved that transfer. During the hearings at that time the discussions with both the City staff and the Mayor and I think probably Mr. Johnson from the Planning and Zoning Commission was there, it was made clear that Tom Scott was going to want to use more of the site than what Advantage Auto originally thought they would use. And it would be necessary to apply for a new conditional use permit, that is what the City advised Zamzows. Of course that is what this application is for. What Zamzows asks this body to do is that it approve the conditional use permit generally in accordance with the previous approval, that is for a use as a new and used recreational vehicle sales and service facility. There are of course a couple of differences. First of all that the landscaping that is now required for the site is expanded over what was originally required for the site because now the site is bigger. Landscaping is required to extend across the entire first Street frontage and is of course required along the Meridian Road frontage and adjacent to both of the northerly and southerly boundaries, Les Schwab on one side and the residence on the other. A landscaping plan has been submitted, it was prepared by Billy Ray Strite Architects. He had conversations with Shari Stiles and it is my understanding that she is generally in agreement with the proposal. If that is correct then that is what the applicant proposes to build. Another difference I guess is that the Ada County Highway District has required some additional dedication and improvements on the Meridian Road side of the property that of course it didn't require before becuase the Meridian Road side of the property wasn't involved in the application. We have reviewed the Ada County Highway District requirements and find that they are generally acceptable except for one. We think we can get it worked out with the Highway District. What that has to do with is the amount of public right of way trust funds which are to be deposited for the sidewalk along Meridian Road. As I read the Highway District's requirement$ they calculated the • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 12 amount of that deposit based upon 320 feet of frontage, but we believe that there is only 260 feet of frontage along there. So we think they probably just over charged. it. Like I said I think we can get that worked out with the Highway District. I have also reviewed the City's staff report that was prepared and submitted before the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing and are in agreement with most of i#. There is one fairly significant issue that we would like this Council to take into consideration tonight. That is with respect to the requirement that the existing graveled area on the what I will call the back side of the property over on the Meridian Road side of the property, we are seeking to have the Council not accept staffs recommendation that that entire graveled area be paved. There are a number of reasons for that and Mr. Zamzow is here and can explain these things to you in a little more detail. But, said simply the least that Zamzows has with Tom Scott Automotive is only a 3 year lease. The intention is tp use that property at the end of that lease for another purpose. And Mr. Zamzow can talk to you about that. That other purpose, the expectation is that they build a building on it. The hope is that the Council would not require to pave that graveled area only to have to come along behind it three years from now and dig it all back up in order to build a building on it. That graveled area as I understand it is intended to be used by Tom Scott Automotive as a place to park vehicles that before they go out on display they have out there (inaudible) while they are waiting to be serviced or waiting to be picked up after having been serviced. So we are hoping for is that portion of the property can simply continue to be used as we understand it has been used by Meridian Ford. We know that there have been some concerns expressed over the course of the last few months about the lack of progress on the landscaping and the other improvements which the Council imposed on the original conditional use permit. I think that Mr. Zamzow is probably just about as frustrated with that as you are. But perhaps I can help to explain what has been done and why it is that you don't see trees and shrubs out there now. When Tom Scott Automotive came into the picture, we knew from the beginning or Mr. Zamzow knew from the beginning that they were going to want to use more of the property and he expected that if they wanted to use more of the property and to revise that he would have to come in and get an additional conditional use permit. Knowing that the Council was likely to impose landscaping improvements and the Ada County Highway District was likely to impose requirements that additional property be dedicated for the right of way it seemed not to make a great deal of sense for Mr. Zamzow to start to work on a portion of those improvements only to have to go back and remobilize and then build some more. The hope that he would be able to do the entire site all at one time. Of course when the original conditional use permit was issued he was required to submit a bond for that work. And that I guess from the practical standpoint is part of what it is that has caused the delay in completing that work. Like to just do it once rather than going to do part of it and coming back and then do some more of it later. Second I guess we didn't know for exactly what either the Highway District or the City Council was likely to impose once they looked at the entire site. Although the landscaping plan I guess is somewhat similar to what was submitted before it is not exactly Meridian City Council December 17, 199fi Page 13 the same and as I said didn't want to build something that the city Council didn't want or wouldn't have required. The second thing is and it is just simply a matter of getting the people out there and doing the work. Mr. Zamzow can tell you about this in a little bit more detail but it is my understanding that the contract has been let. He said he contacted the people to do the work clear back in September or October thereabouts and it has just been a problem with getting the contractor there and on site. I think there have been some delays caused by the weather and concerns about tying up traffic during the holidays. So, what we had thought that we would be able to accomplish without too much trouble was to get it all built at one time once we knew exactly what the Highway District and what the City Council wanted to have built over that entire site. To the extent that has caused any consternation I know that Mr. Zamzow is probably just as uncomfortable as you are about all of that. Finally there is an issue that I guess I need to raise just so that I don't waive the issue it unfortunately it is one of those technical and uncomfortable issues that needs to be dealt with at this level so that in the event there is ever any question about at another level the issue isn't lost. That is the last time I was here before you folks I think I expressed the opinion that I wasn't altogether convinced that Zamzows was required to obtain a conditional use permit for this use because in my view that property is entitled to grandfather rights for a sales and service facility such as what is proposed. That is that it is anon-conforming use. Mr. Zamzow has advised me that he wants to try to work with the City, he too is interested in improving the property and having the property look good because obviously it is one of the entryways to the City. But by applying for the conditional use permit it is important for the City Council to understand that Zamzows does not intent to waive any rights it may have under, to use the property under the non-conforming use provisions of the law. That it intends to preserve any and all legal rights it may have along those lines. What Mr. Zamzow is hoping the Council will do is to be reasonable in its approach and expect reasonable actions on his part. With that I will be pleased to answer any questions. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I have a question since you are applying for a new and used facility for RV's does that mean that there will not, that you are not applying for a used, new car sales? Bradbury: It is my understanding that the primary use is for new and used RV's. But I also understand that there may be from time to time other sorts of vehicles on the lot as well. Bentley: (Inaudible) is that appropriate since the permit they are applying for is for RV's? Crookston: If all they have applied for is the RV then that is what the use is for. If they have applied to have new and used automobile sales also then that is included and that is what it could be for. It is whatever the application that has been applied for controls that. I don't recall, I haven't looked at the application recently, I do not know what was in fat Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 14 applied for. Bradbury: I was going to say, I was going to rifle through my file to find something that would help answer that particular question. I guess rather than doing that I would like to remind the Council is that this issue was discussed to my recollection last summer when we were here and got the transfer of the conditional use, the original conditional use permit over. At that time I think it was fully disclosed that the primary use was recreational vehicles but there may be other sorts of vehicles on the property from time to time as well. Bentley: What is the time frame on the landscaping? Bradbury: Well the staff report that you have before you I think set an outside time limit of six months to complete the landscaping. With my discussions with Mr. Zamzow he indicates to me that is well within the time frame that he would like to see the work completed as well. He would like to get it done just as soon as (End of Tape) that the staff report has suggested be the outside limit. Bentley: Thank you Crookston: Mr. Tolsma has handed me his copy of the application and it says description of proposed conditional use, new and used recreation vehicle sales lot and service facility. Bradbury: I might also point, I have rifled through my file now too, in the attachment to the application, I guess Mr. Crookston is reading from the face of the application, there is a more in depth summary of what it is the application sought and it says in paragraph five the last sentence is intended the use of the opportunity if the application is approved will be consistent with the uses previously approved by the City. That was I think it was, it has always been clear that the use previously approved by the City was for both recreational vehicles and other sorts of vehicles. Corrie: Any further questions, Mr. Bentley? Mr. Rountree? Rountree: Yes, you indicated that you wanted the Council to consider not having to have you pave the unpaved portion. You indicated that you want some reason here, but you haven't given any date certain about when a building would be built and if at some point in time and a date certain that building is not built is the applicant agreeable to then pave the parking lot? I would like that information, I believe not to pave would require a variance so I suspect it would have to go through a hearing for that, Counselor? Crookston: I beleive that would yes. Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 15 Rountree: The other point as far as paving if I were to be in a position to be reasonable from your perspective and say no paving at a minimum the entryways need to be paved sufficient to accommodate a tow vehicle and whatever RV they are pulling to accomodate safe egress and any driveway through the parking lot should be paved to minimize dust. I don't know if the applicant would have problems with that. Another question I would have is would they be willing to increase the bond amount to make sure that the work get done. Those are the only questions I have at this point here. Bradbury: Some of those things probably Mr. Zamzow needs to answer because he knows better than I. I think that the idea of a period of time within which paving must occur in the event the property, use of the property doesn't change is certainly something worth considering. Yes I agree that the entryways need to be paved, in fact the Ada County Highway District requires, or if they don't require it they certainly recommend it, I have to tell you that I can't remember which it is, but they certainly recommend that a certain distance back from the right of way be paved if it is a graveled area. And Mr. Zamzow is certainly willing to accomodate those requirements. With respect to the issue of a variance. This was something that came up at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting last week and one of the questions that the Planning and Zoning, one of the members of the Planning and Zoning Commission asked at that time is since the paving requirements, I am going to paraphrase becaase I don't remember exactly what the words were, but since the paving requirements appear in the section of the City's ordinance which talks about off street parking requirements is it really, is it truly a requirement that this property be paved, this portion of the property be paved since what the application seeks is approval for a sales lot. Okay, so it got me thinking a little bit about that. At that time I think Counsel said you know good question, I am not sure I know the answer. And got me thinking about it so I went back the next day to my office and pulled out my copy of the code and I read through the City's ordinance so that I had a feel for that. I will tell you my reaction to that is that the off street as I am reading through the off street parking requirements I am reading them to be requirements that are required of any use that set out how much parking must be provided for a particular use. In this case the use is a sales lot. The parking that we are talking about is like customer parking and employee parking, a place for them to park their cars when they come to this use. In the off street parking requirement portion of the code there is a provision that says how much of the sales lot needs to be set aside for off street parking. So it is clear that the off street parking requirements are not to be imposed over the entire property, over the entire use. Those off street parking requirements are to be imposed over that portion of the property that is to be used for parking. Now is there a distinction between parking customers and employees and parking of display vehicles. Well the code doesn't say so but I have to think that there is becaase what the code says is that 1/3 of the property must be set aside for off street parking. So taking that, using my logic if you will, taking that next step 1/3 of the property needs to be paved. One third of the property is already paved. So I don't Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 16 think that the off street parking requirements mandate that this graveled area be paved. Because the off street parking requirements can be met on the balance of the property. Now I don't want you to get the idea that I am saying Council can't impose paving on that because you probably can as part of the conditional use permit you can impose reasonable conditions. One of those conditions may very well be pave the graveled area. .But I don't think that it is mandated that the Council require that the gravel area be paved and if the Council is inclined not to require it I think you are well within your rights and so I don't think it is necessary for Zamzows to apply for a variance for that purpose. Now after that long lengthy explanation I have forgotten what other points you raised. Bond, I think Mr. Zamzow needs to answer that. I have to think that he is going to be willing to work with you on that issue. Were there others? Rountree: I mentioned paving of driving lanes within the gravel area. Bradbury: I think I will let Mr. Zamzows address that one as well. Corrie: Any further comments or questions? Bentley: I have a question for staff, Shari have you reviewed the new plans for the landscaping and are they acceptable? Stiles: Councilman Bentley, Mayor and Council, I beleive great strides have been taken since the initial submittal. I guess my only concern would still be the buffering of the adjacent residential uses. I don't think that they show the landscaping, that the planting strip adjacent to those they do show one on, they do show a planting strip of I beleive ten to twelve feet adjacent to the home on East First Street. But there is an older home on Meridian Street that is a separate parcel that I don't know what is going to happen with that. Apparently it is being rented right now. I just don't want it coming back to me later that the people are upset because the people on East First Street having a planting strip and they have nothing adjacent to them. That would be my only change. Bradbury: I am sure that Mr. Zamzow would be happy to sit down with staff or have Mr. Strite sit down with staff and try to work out any further details that need to be worked out. Like I say we are trying to get along. Corrie: Any further comments or questions from staff for Steve? Zamzow: My name is Rick Zamzow, Mayor you have probably heard more from me than you ever want to hear, but I am a little tired about coming back up here on this. It seems like the process is no doubt, you cross all the is and dot all the is and that is good. The, I was going to say that next month this will be one year exactly that we have been going • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 17 through this process of trying to get this conditional use permit. The fact that my previous renter walked is nobody's fault, it is not your fault. But, it still is a lengthy process to get this done. Obviously we have budgets we try to work under and I had never dreamed that I would have to pave that area in particularly when we originally started working with the Tom Scott people. I guess that would be my fault for not Ipoking into the ordinance a little more. The rent that I charge them for what I call over flow parking for their RV's was for that whole area was $500 a month for that gravel area. With the requirements of Ada County curb, gutter and sidewalks and set backs and landscaping at that rate return on investment will be some time 150 years from now so that is not very good business. That is not your problem either. But, long term, I will be honest with you, I have two people, one went away but we had the agriculture administration wanted to build offices there. Since I have talked to Captain Tom Peterson who wants to build a salvation army thrift store at that location and I have several inquiries because that is a real desirable area. Using it for off street parking or whatever you would like to call it is probably not real good for long term. So, no matter whether you like it or not, I am going to be up here in front of you trying to get that rezone conditional use permit sometime in the near future. So, if we pave it now or we pave it later it will get done. In regards to the buffer on the old house we had left that off intentionally, that property will be sold and will be used commercially. At that time the buffer will be required but that property will go away. It is for sale right now and that will be all cleaned up. tt is kind of like trying to put the hose behind the carriage if you will. You can't make that decision but there is no question that you will be in control of that property sometime in the future because it is not going to stay there at a $300 rental. The same with that grave area. In other words you are never going to lose control of it. With that in mind we would like to have that variance in consideration no matter how you look at it. It will be paved sometime in the future. I have no problem paving it, I have a problem being in business and doing something that is a waste of money and I consider that a waste of money if we pave it. That is all I really have. Rountree: Do you have any difficulties with the questions or points that I raised about establishing a date certain at such time that you would pave it, paving entryways and paving drive ways within the graveled area? Zamzow: I don't have, I would have to walk out there with you Charles, and just take a look at, the entryways are paved to a point when they put in, I think when they paved that road it paved back 20 feet. I don't know how far, we are going to have to put curb, gutter and sidewalks and landscape in the Meridian side. That will be widened I understand to four lanes and so no I wouldn't have any problem at all with that. As a matter of fact the lane is between Les Schwab and that is paved so the one already is, the other one would just be the pavement between the old house that is about ready to fall down back along that strip. That wouldn't be a big project I don't believe. What was the other question, the bonding. No that is a requirement, I fully anticipated that. Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 18 Corrie: Any further questions for Rick? Thank you Rick. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, point of discussion with respect to this paving issue and landscape issue on Meridian Street. I guess it is from a technical standpoint, I am a little uncomfortable having to deal with this right now given the fact that the money has been appropriated and is in the fiscal 96/97 budget with ACHD for right of way acquisition on both Franklin Road, Meridian Road for that expansion and construction of Fiscal 97/98. The issue with respect to the house could very well be that the house goes away as part of that road expansion. Depending on where that line goes through. I don't know that at this juncture we are able to identify where the landscaping and or paving ought in fact to be. What I would hate to see us do is to mandate that stuff be put in now only to be torn out 18 months from now or as quickly as 12 months from now when the construction in that corridor begins. I think that it makes a good deal of sense in my mind to rhove forward with the conditional use but maybe address some of those issues with that expansion of that road. Now having said that I would like to have some comments from staff concerning what their knowledge may be. Stiles: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council, Ada County Highway District has completed their design of that section of roadway. They know where their takings are going to be and they have street sections of the entire project on Meridian Road. Morrow: That is correct Shari but if you will recall in our last meeting with the ACHD Commissioners at Commissioner Eastlake's position she wanted that design revisited for possible width along Franklin and Meridian Road. In the budget there are additional monies for additional design work and I am guessing that may very well be for just those kinds of things. I can't tell you that it is cast in stone that design has been picked or was picked by and supported by us within the City of Meridian and with the ACHD staff and with the Commissioners of record at that time is in fact not going to slightly be modified, don't know. I know that her direction to the staff in our joint meeting was that they research some of those things and then get back to them. So that is why my comments are being made. Stiles: I would think that by the time they got that they would have that resolved before the landscaping was even started. Morrow: Could easily be, t think the other thing from the construction standpoint you know that there is going to be slop over and it seems to me that it makes sense to do all of those things in conjunction with each other as opposed to having a wheel from a ten wheeler driving through somebody's sprinkler system and landscape system. So it looks to me like we need to develop some flexibility particularly on the Meridian Road side as point of observation. r~ L Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 19 Rountree: I think you are correct and if that project is that close that needs to be done. There is no sense in advancing this landscaping and improvements as you say only to have it torn out by construction activities which will happen. Stiles: So in that case we would bond for the improvements for the six months if we needed to extend that bond for that portion we would do it at that time. Morrow: I think so, I think the practical sense here is that we let the street improvements get in get done and then have Mr. Zamzow and his crew come back and landscape to back of curb, back of walk, everything that is there and fixed elevations, they are all known factors and then we are not wasting the good consumers dollar in having to do something twice. I am sure that it would be agreeable with him to continue that bond in force until that work is done. Who knows how budgets go with governmental entities but at this juncture right of way acquisition is this year, construction (inaudible) next year. So it looks to me like knowing that that we as a City approach it from that standpoint. Stiles: But you are not suggesting waiting on any improvements except Meridian Road is that right? Morrow: I think that it makes some sense to wait on the Meridian Road improvements and I don't see waiting on any of the improvements on East First at all, I think the landscaping next to the old house is somewhat suspect and I think in terms of lot pavements it may make a certain amount of sense to de#er on some of that and require soil sterilents and dust control agents to be in place there while we are waiting for what ultimately comes out with the road improvement. I certainly don't disagree with Councilman Rountree's position that the entrances at least need to be temporarily done to control that also. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I want to go back and ask Mr. Bradbury a question, I would like to know if that would be acceptable because earlier you stated you didn't want to do landscaping and then have to come back and do a second phase of landscaping and now we are talking doing. exactly that, is that going to be acceptable. Bradbury: Actually it would be because what we would is we would run the water line down and dove it off with that and I think we could plan if we knew that going in. Bentley: Thank you. Corrie: Council do you want to find new findings of fact and conclusions based upon the discussion tonight or do you want to change them at hand? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I guess the question in my mind would be to City Attorney in terms of Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 20 the things that we would like to see done if that is what the direction of the Council is can they be incorporated within these findings of fact (inaudible) Crookston: You could use what has been prepared for Planning and Zoning but I think you would have to interlineate quite a bit so I think that the City would be better off to have new findings of fact and conclusions of law prepared. Morrow: That being the case Mr. Mayor I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare new findings of fact and conclusions of law for the conditional use permit for new and used RV sales and service facility by Zamzows. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to request new conditions, new findings of fact and conclusions of law for the conditional use permit for the new and used RV sales and service facility by Mr. Zamzow, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY BY WESTERN PCS II CORP: Corrie: Please state your name? Wiltsee: My name is Dave Wiltsee, I am representing Western PCS, we are located at 3184 Elder in Boise. In the spirit of the season I am going to be merciful and stick to my three minutes. I represent Western PCS a major wireless telecommunication firm with extensive licenses to serve most of the western United States at this point. The project that the particular site that we are going to discuss this evening is part of is a phase of this project that extends from Ontario Oregon east to Mountain Home approximately. The particular site that we are proposing and the nature of this business is to build and utilize telecommunication towers mounted with antennas to bounce signals back and forth. That is pretty much the nature of the wireless industry today. The particular type of system we are building here is going to be a considerable advancement over the traditional analog cellular systems and that it is digital and has many attributes including being able to serve more different kinds of devices have a larger capacity and also be virtually foolproof as far as copy numbers and that kind of thing which is becoming increasingly common with analog cellular systems. The nature of the beast also is the antennas have to form a network and essentially be line of site that is each set of antennas has to be high enough to see some others not all others in the entire network as I describe the network that we Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 21 w are now planning and building stretches from Ontario to Mountain Home will probably have 35 to 40 sites somewhere in that vicinity. We are already underway with about seven under construction at this point. Originally about 3 months ago we had planned to put a tower of the type we are proposing now over on the other side of the freeway. In one of Mr. Van Auker's property, that is now being built into an office complex there. We subsequently pulled that application and decided not to utilize that site and came across the other side of the freeway at the present site that we are proposing here is at 508 Bower Street along the rail .road track on the other side of the track from town here. The particular facility is going to be on 1.46 acre piece of property that is essentially owned and operated by the McCray's they own a plumbing supply place over there along the tracks on Bower Street. What we are proposing here is to lease a 40 foot by 40 foot area, fence it and install a 12 by 20 concrete pad on that pad would sit a so called BTS base transceiver station which is the brains and computer switching equipment of the station. And 120 foot monopole on top of that monopole would be antennas 4 foot by about 8 inches wide. We presented this proposal to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Commission came up with facts and findings and certain conditions which we would be glad to comply with. We are more than happy to comply with any paving requirements which I understand are urged by the City. And also would be happy to design an appropriate landscaping plan. So that is about all I have to say and I would be more than happy to answer questions. Corrie: Council any questions? Morrow: My only question would be this is for cellular type phones, digital systems. Wiltsee: More than phones, both now and increasing need of the future the capability of supporting modem communications, graphics and things of that sort (inaudible). Bentley: I have a question a requirement that I would request be attached to this. That if there is any interference with emergency systems that you be required to remedy the problem. Wiltsee: Absolutely, as a matter of fact, we couldn't operate if there were any interference. Because of the differences infrequencies it is almost assured that there would not be any. As a matter of fact we offer and make it available to emergency services to be able to use our tower at a lower elevation perhaps in the antennas so that there is no conflict. Bentley: Well we do have a conflict with one tower here in tower. Wiltsee: I see, well we will certainly check that out and make sure that doesn't occur. • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 22 Bentley: Chief, do you have any problems or any comments you care to make on this application? Gordon: No sir (inaudible) you mentioned allowing public safety antennas to attach to yours, there could be a time in the future where I will probably be talking to you. Wiltsee: That would be fine, that would be great. We have done that in Garden City in fact we built one it is already up now, it actually on the Garden City Hall property and they are using it. Their antennas are a lot higher than they used to be, much better coverage. Gordon: Other than tha# no problem. Corrie: Thank you Chief, any further questions? Tolsma: I have a question about the findings of fact, paragraph eight on the findings it says the property is owned by McCray, that south of the property is the rail road tracks and north is the plumbing supply business. If this is on Bower Street (inaudible) page three. Corrie: Should be south, north should say south and north should say south probably (inaudible). Crookston: I would just advise the Council that it is getting close to Christmas and it is hard for me to tell north between south pole. Corrie: We could make that correction I guess (inaudible). We have to get the north and south correct here. That would be, Mr. Tolsma I guess, north of the property is the rail road tracks is that correct? Tolsma: Yes Corrie: And to the, is it still north, is the plumbing supply business to the south, that would be south is the plumbing supply business. Okay that would take care of those and then the property, take one of the p's out of there. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of law as prepared for Planning and Zoning as just corrected. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the findings of fact and conclusions of law as provided by the Planning and Zoning with the corrections as • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 23 made, any further discussion? Roll call vote. ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: I will entertain a motion for the decision? Morrow: Mr. Mayor, Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends approval of this conditional use permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application and the conditions set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law. That the property and the applicant be required to meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, the Uniform Building Code and any other ordinances of the City (inaudible) all parking areas shall be paved with the additional condition that there be no interference to any existing public or antenna systems or communication systems and that at some point in the future the City have the right to add public communication items to that antenna. Rountree: Second, with the substitution that is a motion of the Council not Planning and Zoning. Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea FIVE MINUTE RECESS ITEM #11: MARTY GOLDSMITH: DISCUSSION OF SALMON RAPIDS PHASE 3: Corrie: Mr. Attorney? McColl: Mr. Mayor and City Council, we have, Brian McColl I represent the developer Marty Goldsmith of Farwest Developers. It is not exactly pending, the developer has submitted an application for final plat approval of Salmon Rapids No. 3 and that application has not been accepted probably for good reason. So before proceeding with either me filing that application. There is a problem with this development and I don't know I think about a month or so ago I had written a letter to the City outlining in some detail that problem. Let me just briefly give a little background. Before proceeding with or refiling the application we wanted to set forth two possible directions that we think we can go in. This is Salmon Rapids No. 3, Salmon Rapids No. 1, call this Salmon Rapids No. 2 actually it • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 24 is an actually iffy bitty 2 lot thing down (inaudible). One of course has been recorded and fully developed out, it sewers into the Nine Mile. Two sewers into the Nine Mile. Preliminary plat public hearing was back in August of 1995 for Number 3. It was ultimately zoned annexed and preliminary plat approval in Febnaary of this year. At the public hearing there was quite a bit of testimony concerning the following problem. The southwest portion of Salmon Rapids No. 3 cannot because of the low lying nature of that property sewer intp the Nine Mile. City Engineer had pointed out in a staff comment the developer's engineer who was then Roylance had indicated on the preliminary plat that there are lots. that wouldn't sewer into the Nine Mile, they had to flow this way into the Ten Mile Trunk and the developer acknowledged the same. Consequently that preliminary plat got approved with the concept that although the upper lots would sewer into the Nine Mile the low lying lots would not. It was at a preliminary stage, there had been no engineering done at that point. It was not entirely clear from an engineering perspective how many lots would not physically sewer into the Nine Mile. The preliminary plat that Roylance had submitted had sort of marked in gray and had put on the legend identifying potentially the sort of greatest number of lots that would have that problem again without any engineering that was about 37 lots. Since then the engineering as been done, the engineers (inaudible) and it would appear that it is more like 13 to 15 lots would have to sewer into the Ten Mile. Now instead of presenting a final plat that had those ten or 15 or so lots sewering into the Ten Mile in accordance with the preliminary plat we submitted a final plat application that provided for fill on all of those lots so that all of the lots would then sewer into the Nine Mile. The City Engineer took a look at it I believe and Shari looked at it and said wait a minute this thing does comply with the preliminary plat because the findings and testimony etc. said some of these lots are going to have to go into the Ten Mile. and so she said it was unacceptable. I think rightly so. But then in discussions with staff it turned out that there was another problem other than the engineering that was at the heart of the issue. That problem was that based on the overall sewer plan-for the City quite frankly all of the lots even in two and all of the lots in three because they are on this side of the Eight Mile really ought to be going to the Ten Mile just from a capacity perspective. And so instead of permitting us to proceed with maybe ten or fifteen of these lots going there the concept was that they wanted as many lots as possible, I believe, to go into the Nine Mile. So, we have two ideas. One would be to back up and put a pump station down here. And to re- engineerthe entire phase three so that this is about 74 lots so that all 74 lots would flow southwest. Now the sewer isn't down here, in fact the sewer isn't even at the edge of Meridian Greens, it is up here (inaudible). If a pump station was permitted we would pump up and temporarily go into the Nine Mile when Ten Mile was fully developed, remove the pump station and then all 74 lots would then go down into the Ten Mile. That particular solution we think but this is where we want some guidance from the Council would not only solve the developer's problem, he obviously wants to proceed with the hole phase three. But it may or may not solve the concern that this whole phase really ought to have been in the Ten Mile. From a capacity point of view the Nine Mile is nowhere near capacity so Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 25 the interim period this wouldn't overfill Nine Mile and quite frankly I am not sure that the ten lots or so would make much difference. I understand that the Council has in the past had some problems with pump stations so if that is not acceptable the other way to proceed would be to proceed in accordance with the preliminary plat. That is submit a new final plat that would be more or less consistent with that preliminary plat. We would sewer the. lots that can sewer into Nine Mile and the lots that can't sewer they would sewer into Ten Mile. We would ask that the Council instruct the City Engineer to work with our engineer to find out exactly how many lots those are. We think it is about 15 and I don't think that the City Engineer believes that it is any different. Admittedly on the preliminary plat is was a lot larger number. So that is kind of where we are and the engineer (inaudible) or the number of lots that wouldn't sewer. The purpose of this was to kind of get it out in the area of discussion before we went one way or another thinking that the Council may have some desire in which direction they want us to go. (End of Tape) Smith: Brian, could you clarify something for me, I think I know the answer but maybe it would be beneficial for the Council to know. Of your two alternatives one being a resubmittal of the final plat such that all the 10 to 15 lots are served by gravity back to Locust Grove. Am I correct in remembering that requires a substantial amount of fill in the roadway area in the southwest corner in order to gravity flow all but 10 to 15 lots. McColl: (Inaudible) it was my understanding that we are going to have to ultimately fill those lower lots anyway because of the water table on the road, I don't know. Maybe Stan can answer that question. McHutchinson: For the record my name is Stan McHutchinson with Briggs Engineering, business address is 1111 South Orchard. Gary, to answer your question we would propose that all of the lots that drain back into Locust Grove Sewer will not have any fill on them at all, in order to serve. In other words we would follow the City's criteria as far as depth below subgrade for the sewer. If fill is required then that lot will not be added to drain to Locust Grove. There is a ground water problem in that area and it was recommended by the Soils Engineer to fill some of the lots because of that ground water. I think in some areas it is only 19 inches deep. Corrie: Council, questions? Mr. Morrow? Morrow: (inaudible) Gary, can you, I guess, the issues here are, my first question is with respect to, this is an issue where you have an interbasin dividing line that determines which flows go to Nine Mile, which ones got to Ten Mile. Is that the basis for the decision that both phases two and three really belong in the Ten Mile Drainage? Smith: Councilman Morrow, as you know the dividing line for the Nine Mile sewer line and Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 26 ~J the Ten Mile sewer line is the Eight Mile lateral, topographically that is the dividing line. I have always exercised as much judgement as I could as to how much property on the outside of a drainage could flow into a drainage area. It is not reasonable to say that a house on the northeast side of the Eight Mile lateral could sewer to Nine Mile but a house on the southwest side of Nine Mile or Eight Mile lateral has to sewer to Ten Mile. So we exercise some judgement there as to how much can sewer into an adjoining drainage area although it may not be within that drainage area specifically by a line drawn on the ground which is the Eight Mile Lateral. The problem that comes to the front is how much property outside of this theoretical drainage area line can you sewer into, how much property that is outside of this drainage area line can you sewer into the drainage without impacting the capacity of the sewer line within that drainage area for property upstream or down stream that would normally discharge in the drainage area or that is within the drainage area that is not yet developed. So that becomes the $64 question that is really kind of hard to answer. It is all theoretical at this point because of the amount of Vacant land that exists out there. We simply have to put some numbers to it and see what could discharge into that line versus how much property that is outside the drainage is being proposed to discharge into that sewer line. Morrow: So at this juncture if I understand you correctly we have not done a study or anything to indicate how far to the southeast of the Nine Mile the trunk line and correspondedly the number of potential home sites or business sites whatever that it can serve. Smith: We have done that study Councilman and I just, that was part of our facility plan that showed the capacity of that sewer line based on the area that it serves. That sewer line has been built in accordance with that facility plan requirement. They have assumed a density out there of dwelling units for the drainage area and calculated the flow based on that assumption. I guess you got to look at a question here or a possibility of build out in the drainage area and when that might occur versus what the proposal that you are hearing tonight timing of that proposal. Obviously this is going to come at a rather rapid fashion as compared to the continued development of that drainage area. If the Ranch Subdivision for example had developed and had proceeded forward as it was originally proposed that would have seriously impacted the capacity of the sewer line in the Nine Mile Drainage. That hasn't happened yet, I don't know what might happen out in that area. Morrow: My next question is this is supposed to naturally drain into the Ten Mile Drainage, what is the status of the Ten Mile line and where is it currently constructed to and what is the issue to get it from where it ends now to this property to service this property? Smith: The Ten Mile trunk sewer is presently within the confines of the Meridian Greens Subdivision somewhere, I can't tell you exactly where that is. It is my understanding that Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 27 Glenco the developer of Meridian Greens has submitted the revision requested revision to the development plans that were previously approved on Meridian Greens Subdivision No. 3. Obviously, well I shouldn't say obviously, but typically developers don't like to extend sewers through their properties for someone else to grab hold of and continue on and place some additional competition in the market. So the extension of the sewer Line through Meridian Greens will probably occur when the last phase of Meridian Greens is developed. Morrow: Is that not a requirement of our ordinance that it be constructed to and through? Smith: It is a requirement, it is a requirement as I understand it as the construction takes place on the subdivision that the facilities are extended to and through. It, I don't believe it is a requirement that once the plans are approved that they have to extend it through to the limits of their property. If that portion of the subdivision is not going to be developed for sale of lots. Morrow: If you have a down stream user that is ready to tie on for that service how does that impact that ordinance requirement or does it? Smith: I don't know, I can't answer that. I think one developer can effectively block another developer by not extending the services. Morrow: Can or cannot? Smith: Can Morrow: Is there any other parcels of ground between the parcel in Meridian Greens that is not yet been extended and this property that needs to be extended through? Smith: Yes Morrow: And that would be in? Smith: Mesa Way Subdivision, Kachina Estates, it is between Meridian Greens and this subdivision as far as Ten Mile Creek is concerned. Morrow: Is that property ,those are five acre tracts as I understand. Smith: They are larger acreage tracts. Morrow: What is the potential of a late comers agreement if this applicant would extend Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 28 that through that area? Smith: It is the same potential as any other extension that a developer makes. If someone connects or if the City Council agrees to the late comers agreement with the developer and someone connects to it then of course they pay the late comers fee. Morrow: So there are other avenues of sewering this via late comers fee then just pumping stations or interbasin transfers. Smith: There is the alternative of this developer extending the sewer along Ten Mile drain assuming that he can get a hold of it. I don't know from a legal stand point if this developer can force that issue or not. McColl: There is one problem, a late comer agreement vehicle for this purpose but there are two private properties or three that an easement has to be obtained from. I don't think the developer or any developer has control of that. So, there are three easements that have to be obtained and I don't know if the City or anybody can force the developers in Meridian Greens to grant an easement to extend the sewer. Morrow: Let me ask you this Mr. McCall, the issue is in my mind is at what point do we as a City see that those lines in fact get build and the issue with the pump station if that is what is approved or gravity flow situation resolves itself. Let's for argument sake assume it is the Highlands that begins developing next year and they consume most of the capacity of the Nine Mile Trunk line. We have sewage coming from these projects on a temporary basis and they have to go how does that problem get resolved? McColl: Based on my non-engineer analysis of these basins it looks like there is still (inaudible) there is also substantial developable land in the Ten Mile. So we would anticipate that development pressure would require someone to go get the Ten Mile. We would be willing to get the Ten Mile now if we could get it. Getting it from Meridian Greens turns out it is going to be a little easier than I thought. Because Meridian Greens has platted all of number three and they have provided for an easement down Ten Mile. As Gary points out the developer is holding off the last construction phases of three until he chooses but he legally can't stop us from getting it because that easement is there. Going through Kachina Estates is not a problem. As you can see from this map it would affect one, two lots, we would have to number one acquire an easement from both of those lot owners, we have talked to both of them and one probably is not a problem and the other is a major problem. So that is why the thought was go ahead as we, our preliminary plat and just leave this undeveloped until there was more pressure to bear upon these folks to let us come get it and then we go get it. If the City felt there was excess capacity in Nine Mile (inaudible). It is a tough problem and I don't know which (inaudible). Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 29 Morrow: I think from my perspective I don't have a problem with temporary solutions if there is a permanent long term solution that is doable and it is simply a matter of time before it gets there. I think what you are indicating to me here, is that we have a temporary solution we don't have a real viable long term solution and we are leaving that to future City Councils to have to grapple with. I am not that is responsible on our part if we do that to a future City Council. McColl: Well the long term, this is really shooting from the and maybe Wayne has got some comments on this, but the long term solution if both those lot owners in Kachina Estates said no, I won't give you an easement short of a million dollars Council may be able to go in and condemn. But we can't do that. So in terms of a long term solution I think there is probably a way out. Morrow: I have no more questions. Corrie: I suspect if push comes to shove and there are capacity problems the City may have to go to that condemnation proceedings. But we would rather, but sometimes your growth will cause that problem to exist. Any other comments or questions, Mr. Tolsma? Tolsma: I believe one of the major problems why that easement is very hard to come by in Kachina Estates is Mr. Goldsmith does not have any friends in Kachina Estates. I am sure you are well aware of that. They are all up in arms in a body to repel anything that he does because he has not been very honest with them and upfront with them in the past. Being as all of his land abuts the easterly side I guess they are not on very friendly terms (inaudible). I believe if he went in there and was straightforward and honest and upfront with those people I think that there would probably be more of a (inaudible). McColl: Well Councilman I can't really; I do know my client from time to time has not won any popularity prizes. Having said that it is really a question of dealing with the (inaudible}. I know that this particular lot owner is not very happy with us because the fence as it turns out (inaudible) he is encroaching on our property. I think we have got that solved (inaudible) boundary line adjustment. I don't actually know either one of these gentlemen and my client has just told me that he has approached both of them and one is a problem and one is not. (Inaudible} Corrie: Any further questions or comments, Council? Staff? I don't know whether you got any answers. McColl: No we haven't, without a real answer I guess we would be inclined to resubmit the final plat in accordance with the preliminary plat and provide for the upper lots to drain into Nine Mile as approved with the preliminary plat. And those lower lots to sit there until we Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 30 can get the easement. But if that capacity problem was a large one and if the City Engineer thought that perhaps it was a mistake to approve originally any of these lots going in here we do the lift station. We are talking about 40 or 50 lots that have been approved to go this way. ff we put in the lift station they would eventually all go that way, but I don't know what eventually is. So we really are looking for some guidance and I don't have a sense that we have got any yet. Morrow: I guess to step forward here I can't give you any guidance right now because very candidly I kind of need to think about it. There are several options here. I think that I would like to think those through from my perspective, talk some more with Mr. Smith. Quite candidly I don't know (inaudible). Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I agree with Walt in terms of an answer, my preference, having seen what has been presented would be that the developer pursue the easement approach and extend the Ten Mile and if the City has to get in an easement arrangement that we explore that possibility. But I, like Walt, would like to have additional time to think about that and the other options presented and some guidance from staff. Corrie: I guess Brian would it be apropos for your client to maybe give us 30 days to discuss this and then perhaps come back and give you a little better idea of what they are thinking on what we can do and what we can't do as well as your client seeing about the possibility of the Ten Mile extension? McColl: Certainly, I think this is a complex problem and there are some trade offs involved. This is the final phase, we are ready to go and we would like to get final plat approval for the final phase but we haven't sold a lot in phase 2. It is just going on record now. So there is some time here and we will hold off submitting any revised plat until, would it be appropriate to put it back on the agenda or meet informally with staff after you have conferred with staff? Morrow: I think my preference would be to have it an agenda item for the meeting of the 21st. Corrie: We can put it on the 21st again for discussion. Is that agreeable to the Council. We will keep you notified Brian on that one it will be the 21st of January, 1997. ITEM #12: MOUNTAIN VIEW EQUIPMENT COMPANY: REQUEST HOOK UP TO CITY WATER AT 700 W. OVERLAND ROAD: Corrie: Is there anyone here from the Mountain View Equipment Company? Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 31 Wilhelm: Paul Wilhelm, I am with Bench Mark Construction contractor for Mountain View Equipment, I don't actually work for Mountain View. This all comes about because of an addition that they need to add onto their service facility. The Fire Marshall Mr. Voss has more or less or has come right out and said they are not going to add anything to anything unless they have it fire protected. There is no way to fire protect it because there is no City water there. If the water was there at the current rate it would be inadequate to run it off of hydrants. And then I guess we then found out there is a proposal in place to run water from down by Meridian Road up to basically the east property line of Mountain View Equipment. I don't know the exact timing of that. I think it is in for approval now, I don't know if it has been approved. I don't know if it is going to be built in the next month or three months or whenever it is. But the problem hits there I guess technically at the east line of Mountain View Equipment is the line between the City of Meridian and the County of Ada. So technically in order to add on to that line so that we can extend fire line across the front of Mountain Views property and then therefore tie on a fire line and go back and sprinkle the facility we need the approval of the City Council to tie onto their water line because it is not technically Ada County's line. Corrie: Question, you say you are right on the City limit line. Wilhelm: I am not an expert on that, that is what I am told. Corrie: (Inaudible) Has Mountain View thought about annexing into the City? You are not the one to ask that question. I guess if they would annex into the city then of course they would have that. Wilhelm: All of this came up we are just trying to adequately fire protect because the City of Meridian fire department is responsible we are just trying to comply with them and get water there. It seemed like the right answer and get somebody's blessing to do that. Morrow: I think Paul from at least from my standpoint, the issue in the past has been Mountain View's reluctance to annex into the City. I know that there are properties to the west that are awaiting that event to happen. Very candidly the construction schedule for the WH Moore project I don't know that we are aware of when that comes about. I don't know that it is timely to solve your construction problem but I think that in this issue it is probably more appropriate maybe for the owners of Mountain View Equipment to answer the questions about annexation or non-annexation. There are issues of if it is non-annexed and extend a double fees being involved and so on and so forth. It seems to me like those issues ought to be covered in terms of trying to solve the problem. I would think that it would be appropriate for those owners or their representatives to research that with staff and then discuss that with the Council. Because it may be less expensive for them to annex and have full services both water and sewer than try to do what they are looking at • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 32 now. Wilhelm: I don't know any of those answers, if they have talked to anybody here or not. I don't have any knowledge. Cowie: Becky Bowcut, Brian is Becky out there. Becky could I ask you the question, you are the engineering people for Mountain View is correct? WH Moore excuse me, that sewer line is being extended west, water line excuse me. What time frame do you know? (Inaudible) Cowie: Well I think Mr. Morrow has a very good point there, maybe they need to explore this a little bit. I realize Paul you are not in the position Wilhelm: (Inaudible) I don't know and maybe they haven't decided to do it for good reasons. I don't have any idea. Cowie: Maybe we need to get back with them and have them contact members of the staff, the engineering department and Planning and Zoning Director and see if we can't have a chat. Maybe work something out on that basis. Council, any other comments (inaudible) Rountree: I think we need to pursue the annexation, it is an oppprtunity to tie onto other desires and activities to the west. Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council one of the questions that was asked us is what kind of flow is available if this water line was extended to Mountain View Equipment for fire protection purposes. Today, December 17, we ran a model or a fire flow through our computer model. That is all we have out there. Utilitizing what we call a firm capacity which means that one booster pump at well no. 14 of the two that exist would be operating, not both of them but just one. We could supply a thousand gallons a minute. Well No. 17 has been drilled and the pump and pump house is out for bid right now to be constructed. When Well No. 17 is activated and one booster pump is operating we could supply 1500 gallons per minute by the computer model at that point. In June of 1995 when the Sandman was built we had a flow test on a fire hydrant at the Sandman of 1500 gallons per minute with a residual pressure of 20 psi. That was with one booster pump because that is all we had at the time in well no. 14 pump house. So, after well no. 17 is completed by computer model with one booster pump running we could supply 1500 gallons per minute at this time. Mountain View Equipment as I understand it only asking for fire flow protection. 1500 gallons per minute by Fire Marshall's requirement would require a sprinkler system within the structure. Without the sprinkler system we could not supply the necessary fire flow. I have not since the time I have been here made any assessment to a building based Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 33 f~ solely on fire sprinkler requirement, fire sprinkler flow. I don't know what our ordinance says at this point on fire sprinklers, if it says anything. The requirement of course, the requirement of our water supply system would be, if a fire occurred how much water would be required. That would be the demand on our system and that would be the basis for the assessment it would be similar to any other assessment that we make. But I don't know what that number is. So I can't give you any guidance particularly the applicant or the representative as to whether or not or what the assessment might be if they are in the county versus the assessment that would be made if they are in the City if they pursue annexation. The other thing that would be necessary by the applicant by Mountain View Equipment would be the extension of the water line across the frontage of their property on Overland Road from their east boundary to their west boundary and that is typical for any development that is taking place. It would be a 12 inch diameter water line. Wilhelm: Mountain View's current, what we have proposed to them currently to try and get the Fire Marshall satisfied was to extend like you say from the east to the west, include 2 fire hydrants up near Overland and near their entrances and then tap off of that 12 inch line bring a fire line back and fire protect the building. Both the old and the new. Corrie: Gary, when is well no. 17 supposed to be up? Smith: I think we open bids Mr. Mayor on January 3 and typically it takes 3 weeks to get the bid contract awarded and all of the paperwork taken care of. I don't recall what the time limit is on that pump house but I wouldn't think it would be any sooner than 90 to 120 days before it would be finished. So that would be 3 to 4 months, February, March April, first of May. I don't know what Mountain View's schedule. Wilhelm: Originally it was quicker than that but it is rapidly deteriorating to about exactly that. We were supposed to have started a while ago. Corrie: Council (inaudible). I guess Council we need some input from you on what you want to do, do you want to pursue this other? Morrow: I think very candidly the owners of Mountain View Equipment ought to be addressing some of those issues and concerns that we have raised tonight. Either address them with the staff and then have the staff report to us what those issues might be and what direction they want to go. I think part of it based on what Gary is telling us is that they need to be aware the potential financial concerns so that they cen make their decision, we don't have that information at this time based on the tests we have run today. I think from my perspective I would like to see them have that information and then them make a decision as to what direction they want to go. If we make a decision whether we want to extend that service and what cost to them. Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 34 • Currie: Any other comment from the Council, agreement or disagreement? Rountree: I agree that we need to correspond back to them on their request and cover those items that have been mentioned here tonight. Have them respond and work with staff and get a staff report to us. Currie: How do you want that correspondence, have Paul deliver it or do you want a letter from our engineering department? Morrow: I think that the appropriate way is that Paul is with the construction and really the issue is between the City and Mountain View Equipment owners that in fact we ought to be corresponding directly with them. He is an able representative of what it is he is trying to get accomplished. He can't accomplish those things without the owners being signatory to everything. So maybe it makes a lot of sense to just deal direct and not have the pressure on either he or Benchmark Construction company when clearly they don't have the ability to sign for documents that need to be done. So I would recommend that our staff communicate directly with the owners of Mountain View equipment with what the issues are that we discussed and get the feedback from them. Smith: Mr. Mayor, I may have missed part of your comments Councilman Morrow, if it is financially attractive to the applicant to do this does that mean that this comes back to the Council then for decision whether or not to allow them to connect to fire sprinkler line to our system because they are in the County? Mon'ow: Well I think so Gary, we have to make a decision that is in the best interest of our system in our City. If they wish to have the benefits of what we have as a City but not be part of the City. Then I think in the public forum we as a Council need to make that decision and take responsibility for the decision whatever it might be. I think that is appropriate. Smith: So at this point we are just on a fact finding mission to determine what .the costs are for the applicant so they can determine how they want to proceed whether they want to consider an annexation to the City of Meridian or not. Morrow: I think so, I think we provide them with all of the cost, we also provide them with the information that although they have been well represented here tonight the issue really is between them and the City of Meridian and they need to represent themselves. Tolsma: You say it is approximately four months before we can deliver the fire flow to that building with the speed that WH Moore runs the fire line and we get our pump and booster pumps up and operational. ~ ~ Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 35 Smith: Well Councilman Tolsma, assuming that we have two booster pumps operating in well no. 14 pump house, we may be able to provide 1500 gallons per minute prior to number 17 coming on line. But, there are a couple of big maybes in there that we don't have excessive water use in that area, that we don't have a failure of one of the booster pumps and that Mountain View has a fire. I mean you can throw these what ifs at these situations, what we try to do is take one of our pumps out of service and say this is a situation that could happen, what can we provide if it does? Tolsma: (Inaudible) guaranteed system (inaudible) Smith: Yes, I would be very, I think we can comfortably provide the fire flow within in that time period. With a margin of safety, I guess being on the conservative side of saying we did have problems with one booster pump, it is not working. Tolsma: But we have a little bit of leeway Smith: We have a little cushion to work with but yes we could, if, well when WH Moore makes their extension of their water line and builds a fire hydrant out there then we can run right out there and flow test a fire hydrant and see what it is. That is the best evidence of course is to have that physical test made. And we could test if with one pump on and two pumps on and different times of the day and see what happens. Corrie: Well fire code is going to require you to have 1500 gallons per minute anyway you slice it. Gary if you will contact Mountain View company and give them the information that we had here tonight and let them make some decisions and then bring it back to us I suppose which way they want to do. Smith: We will do that Mr. Mayor, we will have to make some, based on the information we can get form Mountain View or from their contractor on numbers of sprinkler heads and we may have to make assumptions as to how many sprinkler heads can be or would be on and maybe we will have to work with the Fire Marshall to make some determinations the actual .impact to our system so we can determine and assessment an approximate assessment. I think that is the information that Mountain View will need to have to make their decision. Tolsma: (Inaudible) water supply (inaudible) in that presentation also. Smith: Yes Wilhelm: Can I ask what kind of time frame it takes to make that kind of correspondence? C: Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 36 Corrie: I suppose as soon as we get together with Smith: If we have some information on your building what the addition looks like, I don't know what the Fire Marshall is requiring, is requiring sprinkling of the existing structure also? Wilhelm: 1Nell by code it would almost have to be done. Well not part of it, part of it is. The service shop almost has to be sprinkled, the existing service bay that is sitting there right now. Smith: I don't know whatever the addition is that they are making and whatever the Fire Marshall is going to require to be sprinkled we will just have to try and work out what a demand would be in terms of volume. Wilhelm: We can probably have that information to you as soon as tomorrow morning. Smith: We will try to get right on it. Corrie: Council, do you want to table this until they have got the agreements between the City and Mountain View or do you want to just (inaudible) Morrow: Well I think that the appropriate thing is that we table it to reserve agenda space until January 7 and that way it keeps it an on going issue and allows staff to work out the information and Mountain View to make the presentation. Corrie: Is that a motion? Morrow: It is. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to table this until January 7, 1997, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #13: LAND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH L.J. RANCHES: Corrie: Council do you have that, what is that? Morrow: That would be Gary, that is an issue for land application. • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 37 Crookston: Mr. Shawcroft had the original documents. Berg: From the previous meeting I think it was instructed by the City Attorney to get the signatures from the other portion of the agreement and he has done that and have given that to me for my holding. I think that is what it was kind of left at the last meeting for that requirement and that has been completed. So it is up to the Council to approve it. Morrow: To recap then what we have is we have the lease structured by the City Attorney and acceptable to him, we wanted the signatures of the other parties, the LJ Ranches, we now have that in place and so the appropriate motion would be to authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest that land lease agreement contract with LJ Ranches. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made that the Mayor sign and the City Clerk attest the land lease agreement with LJ Ranches, any further discussion? Hearing none all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #14: RENEWAL OF BEER/WINE/LIQUOR LICENSES FOR 1997: Corrie: City Clerk is this yours or the Chiefs? Chief, do you have any problem, do you have the list? Gordon: Yes sir I have, City Clerk advised me at the onset of this meeting that there was a late filing and it is Baird Oil on Franklin Boulevard which is by the bottle sale for beer license, they have added another applicant to their license. City Clerk also said that the State has already approved it. I would like, I wouldn't have a problem with approving the list but I would like to retain or put a stipulation in there that I have an opportunity to check out this third applicant, does that make sense. Morrow: Now is the third applicant the beer and wine license for WeBair LLC, that is item 15 on the agenda. So we would approve item 14 as it stands and then deal with Chief Cordon's concern on agenda item 15. I would move that we approve the renewal of the Beer, Wine and Liquor licenses for 1997 as per the list that was in our packet. Tolsma: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the list as submitted for Beer, Wine and Liquor licenses for 1997, any further discussion? All those in favor? Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 38 Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea (END OF TAPE) ITEM #15: BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR WEBAIR LLC: Corrie: That is the one that we have here, Mr. Morrow? Morrow: My motion would be that upon approval by Chief Gordon, that the City Clerk be instructed to issue the appropriate beer and wine license to WeBair LLC. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to approve the application for beer and wine license of the WeBair LLC upon the approval of the Chief of Police, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Council, Gary Smith has asked that we have one more item before the Department Reports. Joy Snider called today, she lives at 1005 East Franklin. She is on a septic system leech field and it has gone dead on her. So Gary, would you kind of bring the Council up to speed on this one for us. Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council members. I talked to Ms. Snider late this afternoon and she hand delivered a letter, I have a copy of that for you and I will pass that out at this time. The Snider residence is just east of the cemetery and they have some nine residents or nine people live at that house. Shari help me on this, the classification of people that live at this house? Stiles: They are developmentally disabled. Smith: As part of the development of the Winston Moore project, Meridian Business and Industrial Park a sewer line was installed in Franklin Road for a distance and it appears from the maps that we looked at the upper end of one of the reaches of the sewer line is adjacent to this properties west boundary line and it flows to the east. So there is a sewer line in front of this house, this property. She picked up applications for annexation of the property. I am assuming that she is the owner. She indicated that they would file that application however they have the last two weeks been required to pump their septic tank, Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 39 their drain field has failed. They are agreeable, she is agreeable to a double assessment fee for the sewer upon your approval to connect. I am not sure what their water usage is because they have a well but over the past five days they have had it pumped twice or excuse me five days ago they had it pumped, they pumped it again on Monday, they pumped 1000 gallons and it was a five day period. So they are using roughly 200 gallons a day over that 5 day period. Over a month that would be equivalent to one ERU but my initial reaction with nine people living in the home is that they may be using substantially more water than that. It may be closer to two equivalent residential units. So just from a standpoint of bathing, clothes washing, toilet, etc. Berg: Have we got any notification from Central District Health on this house? Smith: No sir we haven't. Berg: Usually they are the first ones to get a hold of us when there is a situation. It is reverse this time though. Smith: If it did go to Central District Health I think we would have the same reply from them that we received on the Gossage house on the comer of Locust Grove and Overland. And that was connect to City sewer. Gossage wa$ not in the City limits either and Central District Health simply said you don't have an alternative you connect. We are not going to allow you to replace your on site facility because sewer is available. Morrow: Question Mr. Mayor, Gary, on this particular piece of property how large is the piece of property? Smith: I don't know the physical dimensions of it, I didn't have time to look that up. It is deep, it might be an acre in size. Corrie: I guess Gary, she requested here just the sewer line but you talked to her about sewer and water both right? Smith: Yes I did, water is also available, the sewer is on the south side of Franklin Road and the water is on the north side. I explained to her that it has been in the past discussed by the Council as to whether or not an applicant outside the City would be required to connect to the water as well as the sewer if it is available. Sometimes, I think in the past with single family residences we just simply assessed them a double fee for the connection and we billed them a flat rate for the use fee of what a single family unit would use during the winter. That is the way the building is set out is just a flat rate. Where you have nine people utilizing this residence I don't know whether it would be appropriate or not to do that. I really haven't had that much time to think about it. Whether they are assessed one Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 40 assessment at this point and required to connect to the water and then we would look at it over a period of time and say well you are using one assessment and that is fine or you are using two assessments and you owe us . We can require that they enter into that reassessment agreement that we have been using on commercial projects. Tolsma: If she pays a double hook up fee and (inaudible) which is going to take a couple of months Smith: Probably 3 or 4 months, four months. Tolsma: That would give us time then to find out what their equivalent uses would be at that time (inaudible). Smith: The other thing I talked to her about was the possibility of your considering a refund of half of the assessments if they follow through on their annexation and do become part of the City. If they are double assessed at this point and four months from now their annexation Domes through and it is finalized would they be allowed to receive half of this double assessment back. In other words they would have been assessed as though they were in the City. It almost seems to me that the Council has done that before but I couldn't recall specifically. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I am prepared to offer a motion. I would move that we allow Joy Snider at 1005 East Franklin Road to hook up to the City sewer that she does pay the double fees, half of which would be refunded upon successful annexation of her property. And that any future resubdivision for building upon that property be assessed the appropriate sewer and water fees. Bentley: Second Cowie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley on the proposal to add sewer and water lines, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Smith: Mr. Mayor, I need a clarification, was that sewer or was that water required also? Morrow: No the motion was is that to determine now it is sewer only, any future building would require both water and sewer fees to be paid and connections to be made. Because you have indicated this may be an acre parcel which would be subject to possibly resubdivision or a subdivision process for future buildings or as a commercial site. That is exactly right. • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 41 ITEM #16: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: Corrie: You are up next. Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council members, I put this item on the agenda only because I hadn't heard a thing from anybody concerning it other than Wally Lovan stopped by one day and he had an agreement that was sent to him by Albertsons that basically restricted him from developing his property into anything except I think he said he could raise pigs there but I am not certain of that. I don't know where this proposed agreement is for the easements. I haven't heard anything. and Wayne hasn't heard anything. Basically Albertsons is operating and it was my understanding that they were to make efforts to resolve this easement situation with Lovan and that the City Council was being set up as an arbitrator if that came to it. But right now nothing is happening. That is the reason that I asked for it to be on the agenda so that something can happen or it can move forward. Somebody needs to give it a push I guess. Morrow: I would suggest that being the case that a letter from the City would be appropriate to both parties to get moving forward as per the agreement. Corrie: Also, I believe Albertsons is on a temporary occupancy permit at this point and we are going to do some changing on some of these occupancy permits. So that could be also leverage that we could use. Smith: I don't know what the enforcement procedure for these temporary occupancy permit when they don't comply with some conditions of that temporary. But, it is just an issue that is floating and it needs to be resolved and put to bed before we are all retired I guess. Morrow: So let's get the appropriate letters going where they need to go and see if we can get it moved off dead center. Corrie: Counselor can we use some of that language to work into that lease agreement about the temporary occupancy. They have a 90 day and it is going to be up in January. Crookston: What lease agreement are you talking about? Corrie: Well Albertsons and Lovan agreement, lease, I am sony the easement, that we can write them a letter and tell them we need to get this done post haste. I don't know if we can tie the two in or not. Crookston: I would have to take a look at that and see what we can do, as I understand it to put in there whatever we can. Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 42 Corrie: Alright, you need to go back to the minutes and I believe we discussed this (inaudible). Smith: With your permission can I bring two other items before you? This first item is well no. 9, municipal well number 9. The Council previously authorized us to proceed with getting well no. 9 back on line and on an emergency basis. I received yesterday a proposed cost to redrill well no. 9 and I just wanted to bring you up to date that the total cost including engineering is $79,490. That would be the cost to remove the well screen assembly ,take the well down an additional 270 feet, replace the well screen assembly and new filter sand and new surface seal. It includes the test pumping of the well, geotechnical services and my budget item for well no. 9 rehab was $125,000 so we are well under budget. This was the option that was recommended by our geotechnical engineer. Several reasons, one is that we don't have to abandon the existing hole, we don't have to reconfigure the well lot that is a new well house. We don"t have to try and purchase additional property which would be required by water resources. We simply redrill the well, take the well down to a deeper depth and set the well house back on it and proceed to pump water. Rountree: With the reasonable assurance that we will have water. Smith: Yes, we have already put, we pumped, we drilled a test well out there to 1000 foot depth and logged that well and we have that information available and to this date we have had very good success with well drilling and this geotechnical engineer we have been using. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, Gary that amount was $79,490? Smith: Yes Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the rehab of Well No. 9 in the amount not to exceed $79,490, authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest the contract to do so. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley, any further discussion of the motion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council. The last item I have is an update on Tulley park Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 43 and our consultant has submitted a brief letter of information for you along with a review print of the park layout. I would like to submit that to you for your information and comment, it is not necessary that I get those comments tonight but I would appreciate you looking at it and getting bads to me with any comments that you may have. I think there are some interesting things here that the Highway District is wanting to do to us that I would like to have your comment on. This is a copy of the blueprint. We just did receive this information so I wanted to get it to you as quick as I could. The impact fees and the fact that they want us to road trust half the cost of building a bridge over Five Mile Creek on 11th Street are going to impact this project financially. So, we are being as Tim Burgess points out they are treating this project as though it was a private development. Although we are building a public facility, Berg: Doesn't Five Mile Creek go north parallel with the road? Smith: No, 11th is going to be probably will need to cross Five Mile Creek to serve the Simunich property if and when it develops. Our pedestrian bridge is located just west of this 11th street proposed crossing. Corrie: I guess my question Gary, can they treat this as a private development? Smith: I don't know whether they can or not Mr. Mayor but that is the information that our consultant is getting. Morrow: Well Bob in part to answer that question if you will remember in terms of when the Department of Law Enforcement this was approved by us and that thing was in the process ACRD was successful in getting impact fees from the Department of Law Enforcement for that facility and it was as I recall then Governor Andrus was the one that was supportive of those impact fees. And there was some great debate whether you can get impact fees or not from a public entity. So I think, I don't know if this is in the best interest of the tax payer to be extracting impact fees for another public entity, particularly a recreation entity. I think we ought to instruct the City Attorney to check into this very closely and give us some information back. If there is room to challenge then we ought to challenge. Corrie: I concur. Rountree: We collect the impact fees anyway, maybe we can be creative. (Inaudible) Berg: We do have an agreement with them to do things with those funds so hopefully Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 44 without breaching our agreement we maybe could do creative things with that. Corrie: Plus we can get 2 ACHD Commissioners to look at it our way. Okay we will give you some our feed back as quickly as you can members get back with him and I think we need to follow up Walt's suggestion with the City Attorney to make some inquiries. Does this agree with the Council? Rountree: I have one question for Gary, what kind of time line are you on comments on this; I would like to have it go before the Parks and Recreation Commission, our next meeting is scheduled for I believe the 20th of January, is that too long? Morrow: (Inaudible) Smith: That would probably be alright Councilman, I just received the engineering agreement along with this letter and they have proceeded to do some topog work out there so we can get an idea of where we are on fill, how much more material we need. They did that just on the basis that I told them their agreement was approved. But we haven't signed off on it yet. I would like, I definitely want some input and need some input on this thing so we get something done that we start designing something that is acceptable to everybody at least from a majority standpoint. It is not going to be unanimous. Bentley: Gary, have you heard anything on that dirt yet? Smith: No I haven't, I talked to Tim again after you were in the last time and he was going to try and run somebody down and see what was going on with it. Rountree: One other, could you get me either from Tim or some way ten reduced plan sheets or whatever, xerox copies. Smith: Can do, thank you. Corrie: Shari Stiles? Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, I just had one item, Highlands Ranch, did you get that letter in your box any of you, asking to withdraw that. The problem is that it was last on the agenda on February 20th and it was tabled until April 16 but I don't think it has ever been on the agenda since that February meeting, do we need to put that back on the agenda for the next meeting to officially withdraw it or can we do it without? Crookston: It would be appropriate to put it on the agenda and take action on it when it comes up. • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 45 Corrie: We will put it on there. Chief? Gordon: Just one quick one, AT& T Wireless has donated four cell phones to Citizens on patrol with 85 minutes of free air time per phone indefinite length of time. We do have those phones at the police department. Morrow: It is appropriate then that we has a Council and Mayor draft up a letter of thank you to them and all five of us sign it, can you get that letter drafted up for us please? Gordon: Yes sir, I think it is an outstanding idea. Corrie: Anything else Chief? Counselor? Crookston: All I have is the agreement , to see what the Council wanted to do on the memorandum of agreement between the City and Ambrose, Fitzgerald and Crookston on the office space. Morrow: From my perspective it is fine and would be appropriate to authorize the Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest the agreement. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made and seconded that the agreement be signed by the Mayor and attested to by the City Clerk, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Mr. Morrow? Morrow: Really only one item we area meeting tomorrow night at 6:30, Will Berg is providing eats for tomorrow nights meeting so we will be discussing that agenda some issues in terms of the strategic planning thing if we finish in time with the P & Z stuff. The only thing that I would ask from you guys is that shortly after the first of the year we will be holding our annual transportation task force meeting. I need your input as to what major highway projects you might like to see other than the ones that we already have on our agenda and on our program. We will furnish you with a copy of that agenda that we already have in your boxes within the next ten days or so. That is it Mr. Mayor. Corrie: Mr. Bentley? Bentley: I would like to know if we or if anybody is discussing about forced annexation on Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 46 some of these little pocket places we have got all over the City. Morrow: I will answer that, we have had that conversation and yes it has been done before and it seems to be that you do that historically every 7 or 8 years or something like that. Bentley: Is it time to look at that? Morrow: Oh I think, it is probably appropriate, usually what motivates the timing of that is the fire department and police department in terms of confusion with responses and so on and so forth. If Bill comes and says we are having a heck of a time with all of these little enclaves, can you guys help us out then it is my understanding that we bump those up and go from there. Corrie: Chief do you want to say something here? Gordon: Yes sir, I did bring that up to Councilman Bentley, it is not really a major problem we respond to everything we believe to be in the City and when we find out, we have a lot of these little bitty pockets throughout the City limits. We just go ahead and take paper and then we worry about who it belongs to and where it goes. I would just think from a bookkeeping standpoint if it was possible to go ahead and start cleaning up some of these little areas. Morrow: I think the answer to that is it is appropriate to prepare a list of potential sites that could be done and we take the necessary action. I think Ron has more experience and you have dealt with this before and go from there. Obviously we are going to take a little bit of heat for forced annexation but that goes with the business. Gordon: Did you want me to make a list Councilman Morrow? Morrow: I think that is a P & Z function, Chief Gordon. Corrie: You can put some input into I think Chief. Morrow: I think what we ask is that all of the enclaves to be laid out and then we make the decision with your guidance which ones are (inaudible). Tolsma: Ada County assessor's office probably has a list of them. Bentley: Next I have, I spoke with Frank Walker after the P & Z meeting or APA meeting which followed the Area of Impact meeting. I had a pretty good discussion with him concerning the area of impact and we discussed the fact that he was concerned about Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 47 whether the gravity flow was which direction. My point to him was our concern is when does the expansion by Boise stop. You give them these two parcels and the guy next door wants in and it keeps running. And he expressed to me that he is willing to draw a line ending this constant moving of the boundaries. He said that these two lots fall the other way because of the sewer, he is willing to draw the line right there. So I think it is a good step, they are waiting for the results at the next meeting. That is all I have. Corrie: Mr. Rountree? Rountree: Parks and Recreation Commission met December 14, started to put together an inventory of recreation resources within the City limits, reviewed various ordinances and bylaws and the next meeting we will jump into the preparation of Bylaws. They elected as president Tami DeVeerd and as a Vice President Keith Bird. Three positions need to be reappointed. That being the City Council position, the position currently held by Keith Bird of the Meridian Athletic Association and one Citizen at large position currently held by Dave Costello in order to be in compliance with the timing in the existing ordinance. The other item of interest that was discussed was a proposed soccer extravaganza this fall with the alliance soccer league looking at a younger, probably coed soccer tournament consisting of approximately 100 teams coming to the City of Meridian. Morrow: Question Mr. Mayor, are you prepared to resubmit those same names for approval for a full three year term as we speak tonight? Rountree: Well the City Council position and I assume that will rotate on an annual basis. Keith Bird is one that was selected that would come due this time period and Dave Costello. Corrie: Have you talked to those two they want to continue I presume. Rountree: That was the general feeling at the meeting. Corrie: Under the circumstances then I will appoint Keith Bird and Dave Costello and Charlie is bads on the Committee with the approval of Council to make that appointment. Morrow: Mr. Mayor I would move that we appoint or confirm. the appointment of Dave Costello and Keith Bird to a full three year terms, for their seat numbers, which ever seat numbers they might be. Bentley: Second Corrie: Motion made and seconded that Keith Bird and Dave Costello and Charlie Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 48 Rountree be continued for the three year term, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow: Point of clarification, Mr. Rountree will not serve the whole three year term. Corrie: No it will be whoever is the Park Commissioners. Rountree: And probably we should have made that refinement in the ordinance but that is okay. Corrie: Well we can do that if we need to. Charlie I had one other question, have you got any more information as far as that pocket park for the scouts are wanting to know the possibility of might have a shovel turning it. Rountree: Well you provided the information from Dave Hanson to both Keith and I and at this point Keith and I have talked in passing but we have not sat down with one another and I would think that we would want to sit down with Teny Smith as well. Corrie: That is fine (inaudible) Rountree: Keith is a little concerned that there is not much going to happen this winter given the weather that Spring would be more appropriate when we can dig up the water line and may do some grading and then really start to work (inaudible). But as far as the scouts efforts they should be going (inaudible) Corrie: I guess one of the things Charlie that I was thinking about is if we get something official that we are going to start now then they can also start the bricks and that with the blessing of the City. Rountree: I think if we need that then I think the City and the committee that was behind tat pocket park issue (inaudible) for all intensive purposes ground is broken on the development of this park and I will get with Terry aid Keith both on that. Corrie: Thank you that is good. Mr. Tolsma? Tolsma: I have nothing. Corrie: I have one thing, on the Historic Preservation Commission on the appointments I do need your approval. We have got Frank Thomason, Bill Rockhard is expiring 11-97, Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 49 L J Tom Hammond and Robert Hobbs expiring in 11-98, Lila Hill, Gwen Alger and Frank Johnson expiring of 11-99. So they come due in the rotations. So I guess I need to have the Council's approval on the appointments of Bill Rockard and Gwen Alger, Frank Johnson, Robert Hobbs, Lila Hill with the expiration dates as stated. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I think for clarity in the future I would like to call those seats one through six and then that way we as a Council can track the seat and if somebody resigns mid term or changes mid term then a new appointment would be made for that seat for the balance of the term so that we kept the sequence of two every year being renewed and reappointed and we wouldn't get into a situation where we had to have three one year and four a year or something like that. So, with that assignment of seat numbers to those positions, seven, with that assignment of seat numbers to those positions I would move that we approve the Mayor's submittal of names for those appropriate terms, that is it. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the Historic Preservation Commission appointments with the designation of seats one through seven, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: I will sign those seats (inaudible) Morrow: And the fact that we have seven maybe one year we could have three seats due and that will be fine. Corrie: I have nothing further, Mr. City Clerk? Berg: I have a couple of things, one I put in your boxes, the loss control review and I hope you guys read that and the noted departments trying to take care of those improvements. This is a loss control issue and is saves us money from things that could happen. Second thing was I put in your box a letter that I received concerning the Warrior Stadium. They asked me to bring this up to ask that you acknowledge support of this, not acknowledge an endorsement, but just the support. It is something that the community is working on and so I will just leave it up to that if you want to look at that a little bit more. But they are trying to get this thing rolling I believe this Saturday at a basketball game to start handing out these things and get interested people. Morrow: Mr. Mayor, I am prepared to offer a trial motion that we go on record as a Mayor and Council of supporting the concept of home football games in a home stadium for ~. Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 50 Meridian High. Rountree: Second Corrie: You heard the motion, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Corrie: Shannon thank you for coming this evening, I appreciate it, we will be seeing you next week. Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I just have one comment on Will's presentation. I suggest that the ICRMP letter be your suspense that we make sure the appropriate people get the letter and give them a deadline to get the stuff done and then you check and report back that the stuff is done (Inaudible). Berg: All of the department heads did get this letter, all of them. I am not saying just the ones that were there, all of them did. Rountree: (Inaudible) Corrie: We will emphasize that tomorrow. Morrow: I will second Mr. Rountree's motion. Corrie: Was that a motion? Rountree: I can put it as a motion but I don't think it is necessary. Corrie: But they will all get this same thing. Smith: Mr. Mayor, with your permission I just wanted to recognize one of Public Works employees Rick Clinton is here this evening just to watch City government in action, he said he hadn't been to one for a while and he wanted to just come and see what is going on. Corrie: Well Rick I am glad (inaudible) Morrow: I move we adjourn. Rountree: Second • • Meridian City Council December 17, 1996 Page 51 Corrie: Motion made and seconded, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea MEETING ADJOURNED AT 10:43 P. M. (TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS) APPROVED: BERT D. CORRIE, MAYOR ATTEST: `, r~ ~' IAM G. BERG, JR., CI CL RK - B~XL - i ,~ MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: December 17.1996 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 13 REQUEST• LAND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH L J. RANCHES AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ~J 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. LAND LEASE AQ~RE~NT THIS LEASE, made and entered into this day of , 1996, by and between the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality- and political subdivision of the State of Idaho, hereinafter referred to as Lessee, party of the first part, and LARRY D. JAMES, b/b/a L. J. RANCHES, hereinafter referred to as LESSOR, party of the .second part, W I T N E S S E T H: FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the rentals hereinafter provided, and the covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, LESSOR hereby leases and demises to Lessee, for the term herein stated, the property, described as the NW 1/4 NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 36, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, and the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 28, Township 4 North, Range 1 West, Boise Meridian, which shall be hereinafter referred to as the "leased premises" for the convenience of the parties hereto. This agreement is subject to the following terms and conditions to which the parties mutually agree,: TERM: This lease agreement shall be effective from January 1, 1997, to December 31, 1997, subject to LESSOR'S right to terminate the term of this lease as herein below set forth. RENTAL: As rental for the leased premises, Lessee agrees to pay LESSOR, at the address hereafter provided for giving notice to LESSOR, the sum of THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND NO/100 for each parcel, for a total rental amount of SEVEN THOUSAND AND NO/100 per year for the term of this lease agreement which shall be paid on or t • before December 31, 1996. NO RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL ON SALE: In the event LESSOR decides to sell the above described premises, it is understood and agreed that LESSOR must sell the property subject to Lessee's right to use the property and it is understood that LESSOR has not granted to Lessee a right to purchase the premises. USE OF THE PREMISES: It is understood Lessee may use the property to deposit, spread, till, plow, disc, or otherwise place on, and/or into, the land and soil of the property municipal biosolids, which are sewage refuse, and shall have the right to drive vehicles on the land to place the biosolids on the land. It is agreed that Lessee shall have no right to use any water or water right that may accompany the land and that Lessee shall put the land to no use other than as stated herein. It is further agreed that the land is, and shall remain, fallow land. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS:LESSEE shall be totally responsible for all maintenance and repairs on the premises. EXPENSES AND UTILITIES:LESSEE shall pay any and all expenses of every nature accruing by reason of Lessee's use and occupancy of the leased premises, except that LESSOR shall pay all real property and/or water taxes or assessments that are billed to or for the property. DESTRUCTION OR DAMAGE: LESSOR shall have the total risk of loss or damages to the leased premises. EMINENT DOMAIN: In the event that any governmental entity, other than Lessee, shall take the premises by use of eminent domain the LESSOR shall receive the value of the land. LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES Page - 2 • INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY:LESSEE agrees that he will, and he does hereby, indemnify and save LESSOR harmless from all claims, judgments, demands and liability of any person or parties whatsoever resulting from any occurrence, injury or accident which takes place during the term of this lease agreement on or about the premises. Lessee shall obtain liability, premises and on-premises medical insurance insuring Lessee with LESSOR named as an additional insured on the premises and any buildings located thereon, such policy or policies of insurance shall have a minimum limit of $500,000.00 or such other amount as LESSOR shall designate. Lessee shall furnish copies of all insurance policies to LESSOR and all renewals thereof, and shall keep- all such policies in a current status. TERMINATION OF TERM: As stated above in the paragraph TERM, LESSOR may terminate the term of this lease if Lessee violates any of the terms of this Lease; if the term of the lease is terminated for the reason herein stated, LESSOR shall refund to LESSEE that portion of the lease payment for the year, on a pro rata basis, for the time period that LESSEE was unable to use the property. TERMINATION UPON DEFAULT: In the event of default of this lease agreement the LESSOR shall give written notice of such default to the Lessee by postage prepaid, certified mail. If the Lessee's violation of the lease shall continue for thirty ( 30 ) days, the lease may at once be terminated by a second notice to the Lessee by postage prepaid certified mail that the lease is terminated. This lease shall terminate as follows: a) At the expiration of the term provided herein; LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES Page - 3 b) Upon determination of the LESSOR that the Lessee has failed to observe any of the conditions, exceptions or reservations or to fulfill any of the provisions set out in this agreement; c) At the option of the LESSOR on the discontinuance of use of the leased premises by the Lessee; or d) By the mutual agreement of the parties hereto. OTHER MATTERS: a. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to create the relationship of partners, joint venturers, or parties to any joint enterprise in any manner between LESSOR and Lessee. b. In construing this Lease, the singular shall include the plural, and the neuter gender shall include the masculine and feminine, all as the context may require. c . In the event. either party is required to institute any legal action in order to enforce any of the rights, agreements, covenants or conditions herein contained, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to recover such party's reasonable attorney fees from the other party, together with costs of suit., the amounts thereof to be fixed by the Court in such legal action. d. The forbearance or failure of any party hereunder to give prompt notice of default. or termination of this Lease by reason of any act, omission or occurrence, or to strictly enforce any covenant hereof, shall not be deemed a waiver of any of the provisions of this lease agreement as regards any other or further such default or breach, act, omission or occurrence, nor shall consent or approval of LESSOR given in-one instance be construed to waive the necessity for such consent or approval as regards any other or further similar act by Lessee, unless such intention be expressly stated in writing by LESSOR. e. In the event any clause or provision of this Lease is declared by any Court to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason, such invalid or unenforceable clause or provision shall not affect the whole of this instrument, but the balance of the provisions hereof shall remain in full force an effect. f. All of the provisions hereof shall enure to the benefit of and shall be binding upon, the heirs, executors, administrators, personal representatives, successors and assigns of all parties. LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES Page - 4 • NOTICES: All notices hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given when personally delivered to the party, an employee or managing agent in charge of the receiving party's business premises at the time of service thereof, or when deposited in the United States mail, postage fully prepaid, by certified mail, addressed to such other party as follows:. NOTICES TO LESSEE: WILLIAM G. BERG, JR. CITY CLERR 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 NOTICES TO LESSOR: 4UIET ENJOYMENT BY LESSEE: LARRY D. JAMES 2165 Dixie Creek Road Cambridge, Idaho 8361~D Upon performing all of its duties and obligations hereunder in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Lease, Lessee shall be .entitled to quietly and peaceably have, hold, occupy, possess, and enjoy the leased premises during the term hereof, without hinderance or ejection by persons lawfully claiming under LESSOR. ASSI(NT AND SUBLEASE: Neither this lease agreement, nor any interest in the leased premises may be assigned or in any manner transferred by Lessee, without the prior approval of LESSOR expressed in writing. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this lease agreement has been duly executed by the respective parties, the day and year first above written. LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES Page - 5 • LESSOR: CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and political subdivision of the BY Robert D. Corrie, Mayor ATTEST: William G. Berg, Jr., City Clerk LESSEE: ~ ~ Larry J STATE OF IDAHO, ) • ss. County of Ada, ) On this 'day of December, 1996, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Robert D. Corrie, Mayor, and William G. Berg, Jr. , City Clerk, respectively, of the CITY OF MERIDIAN, a municipality and political subdivision of the State of Idaho, known to me to be the entity that granted the LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES Page - 6 _r ~ a, ~ ~ ~ authority to the said individuals to subscribe their names to the within and foregoing instrument in their capacity as Mayor and City Clerk, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same in the name of the CITY OF MERIDIAN. 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) STATE OF IDAHO,) NOTARY PUBLIC FOR IDAHO Residing at Meridian, Idaho Notary expires: ss. County of Ada, ) On this ~'~day of December, 1996, before me, the undersigned,. a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Larry D. James, known to me to be the person who subscribed his name to the within and' foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me 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 cert~icate first abov~ written. (SEAL) ~+ ~. ~? "9 ~~ . ag ~oTARy ~ UBl ~ 4 .f .• '- P ~ ~~~~ PUBLIC FOR ID HO gat 1/~ expires: LEASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MERIDIAN & L. J. RANCHES Page - 7 ~ i MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING: December 17.1996 APPLICANT: ITEM NUMBER; 15 REQUEST: DEPARTMENT REPORTS AGENCY COMMENTS CITY CLERK: CITY ENGINEER: CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR: CITY ATTORNEY: CITY POLICE DEPT: CITY FIRE DEPT: CITY BUILDING DEPT: MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT: MERIDIAN POST OFFICE: ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT: ADA COUNTY STREET NAME COMMITTEE: CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH: NAMPA MERIDIAN IRRIGATION: SETTLERS IRRIGATION: IDAHO POWER: US WEST: INTERMOUNTAIN GAS: BUREAU OF RECLAMATION: OTHER: All Materials presented at public meetings shall become property of the City of Meridian. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION Ordinance #471 "shall consist of at least five and not more than ten members" (seven members) "three year staggered terms" appointed by Mayor Grant Kingsford on November 15, 1994 professional historian -Frank Thomason 3 year -expires 11/97 architect -Jim Shearer 3 year - .expires 11/97 city historian -Lila Hilf 2 year -expires 11/96 president of Historical Society -Gwen Alger 2 year -expires 11 /96 representative -Doug Routan 2 year -expires 11/96 citizen at large -Kent Roberts 1 year -expires 11/95 certified planner -Wayne Forrey 1 year -expires 11/95 APPOINTMENTS Frank Thomason - apt. 3 yr. -exp. 11 /97 Jim Shearer - apt. 3 yr. -exp. 11/97 Lila Hill - apt. 2 yr. -exp. 11/96 Gwen Alger - apt. 2 yr. -exp. 11 /96 Doug Routan - apt. 2 yr. -exp. 11 /96 Kent Roberts - apt. 1 yr. -exp. 11 /95 resign 6/95 apt. Tom Hammond 3 yr. 11 /95 -exp. 11 /98 Wayne Forrey - apt. 1 yr. - reapt. 11 /95 -exp. 11 /98 Hill: No, that is not the intent at this present time. Morrow: Do we have sa~uards to keep those kinds of thir~from happening? Hill: Yes we do. C~e ~ ~~ ~g'_ ~¢ Kingsford: Any other questions? Morrow: I think that covers my questions. Kingsford: Anyone else? Corrie: Do we need to vote (inaudible). Kingsford: What exactly is that we have to do? ~c Hill: You have to re-appoint the members to that current, commission. And you already have those peoples names who have agreed to serve. I think I could probably tell you most of them, Frank Thomason as the Professional Historian, who has a doctorate in history, Wayne Forney who is a nationally certified planner which fills the requirement of a planner, the architect would be Jim Shearer, the City Architect. I think we suggested that it be seven members rather than the 5 that it originally was because of getting a quorum for meetings. The President of the local Historical Preservation Society, myself as the City Historian and then if you wanted to put any other 2 people you want to put on it who might represent the building trade or something like that. Kent Roberts has indicated he would like to serve on it. . Kingsford: You have 6 members and then 2 alternates, oh I counted you twice. That being the case I would suggest to the Council then the re-appointments of Frank Thomason to a 3 year term, Jim Shearer - 3 year tens, Lila Hill - 2 year term, Gwen Alger - 2 ~°ear term and Wayne Forney -1 year term, Kent Roberts 1 year term and Doug Routan would be a 2 year term. Con-ie: So moved Yerrington: Second Kingsford: Moved by Bob. second by Max to approve the reappointment of Frank Meridian City Council November 15, 1994 Page 5 Thomason, Jim Shearer, Lila Hll, Gwen Alger, Wayne Forney, Kent Roberts and Doug Routan to the Historical Preservesion Commission,. all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Hill: Last Summer, the Meridian Fire Depaetment received an invitation to the Idaho Historic Building conrerence :hat was held in Boise in June and that invitation found its way to the Historical Society. Gwen Alger and I attended as representatives of that group away with. The cancellation of this agreement is given may be given written notice from either party within 48 hc~ of that notice and we cancel it. Crookston: Is there any agreement that the City is held harmless from any liability that goes through? Kingsford: No ~ C ~' rn~ ~~-~g-, ~'~ Crookston: I think there should be. Kingsford: We don't open envelopes. Crookston: No but you are going to have possession of those .envelopes for a period of time. Kingsford: Is it the Council's desire to put that in, the hold harmless? Morrow: Are our people bonded? Kingsford: Janice is bonded, I don't know that all our people are. Morrow. It seems to me either we need a hold harmless agreement or we have bonded folk handling that. Kingsford: Okay, we have then another item that we need to change an appointment on the Historical Commission. Kent Roberts has resigned, has left the area and requested that Tom Hammond be appointed to that. I would like to make that appointment with your approval and to re-appoint Wayne Forrey to another term. Morrow: So moved Meridian City Council November 8, 1995 Page 51 Corrie: Second Kingsford: Moved by Walt, second by Bob to approve the appointment of Tom Hammond and to re-appoint Wayne Forrey to the Historical Commission, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea Morrow. Mr. Mayor, while we are on the Historical Commission, Wayne did you research? Crookston: We have not adopted the Historical Preservation building code. Morrow. The UCBC? Meridian Historic Preservation Commission Annual Report 1995-1996 The Meridian Historic Preservation Commission met 10 times during the last year. The main project for the year was the compilation of the "genealogies" of ownership for the properties listed in the 1987 Reconnaisance Survey. This project is about 2/3 complete at the present time and we hope to complete it this year. The status of the Historic Register application for the Tolleth house is still pending. We were assured by the current State Architectural Historian that it would finally be in the mail to the national board by the end of the week. It was necessary for him to correct some of the descriptions before submitting the application. The application was begun under the previous state Architectural Historian and the present one had to finish up the work. The national board has 45 days to handle the application after they receive it - so maybe by the first of the year this will be completed. We have not applied for a grant for the coming year after learning that the walking tour we were. seriously considering would take more resources for matching funds than we would be able to write off as in kind donations of time and labor. :~_. HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY ROBERT D. CORRIE A Good Place to Live .Mayor -CITY OF MERIDIAN OFFICE OF THE MAYOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ORDINANCE # 471 Appointments: By Mayor Robert Come on December 3, 1996 Architect: Bill Rochold -1 yeazs to 11/1997 -Replace Jim Shearer Representative: Gwen Alger - 3 yeazs to 11/99 Replaces Doug Routan 33 East Idaho Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone (208) 888-4433 FAX (208) 887-4813 President of Historical Society: Frank Johnson 3 yeazs to 11/99 replace Gwen Alger Certified Planner : Robert Hobbs 2 years to 11/98 replace Wayne Forrey City Historian : Lila Hill reapointed - 3 Yeaz term Frank Thomason exp. 11/1997 Bill Rochold exp. 11/1997 Tom Hammond exp. 11/1998 Robert Hobbs exp. 11/1998 Lila Hill exp. 11/1999 Gwen Alger 11/1999 Frank Johnson 11/1999 Professional Historian Architect Citizen at lazge Certified Planner City Historian Representative President of Historical Society ~~ Glenn K. Bennett, P.L.S. President Timothy A. Burgess, P.E. Vice President Brad Watson, E.I.T. Assistant City Engineer City of Meridian 33 E. Idaho Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Re: Tully Park Design Services Dear Brad: I am enclosing the following for the Tulley Park Project: ti ~~ •~V w~~ ~ ~,~"'~' ~~ 1. Two original copies of the Agreement For Professional Servi~. 2. 10 copies of a "Final Park Development Plan". ~ ~ ~~ ,~ ~~ ~' } i While preparing the final agreement for professional services I contacted ACHD to confirm their requirements for Linder Road. Ina 12/12/96 telephone conversation Karen Gallagher made the following preliminary comments: ' 1996 1. They are treating this project as if it were a private development. ,~ ~~~~' 2. Impact fees will be re uired. She could not tell me exactly how much they would be. According to the schedule in my ACHD Development Policy Manual the impact fees for a public park in the western city table is $3,869 per acre. There-are approximately 14.6 acres in the park which will result in $56,487.40 in impact fees. I am not sure whether my impact fee table is current: (D 18 -~ 3. .ACHD will only require a 5 foot sidewalk be constructed along Linder Road located 1 foot inside the right-of--way. 4. A half right-of way width of 45 feet will be required on Linder Road. 5. The two vehicle entrances into the parking lot must line up with, or be separated by 150 feet, from any other roadway approaches to Linder Road. L Civil Survey consultants, Inc. P.O. Box .39 1530 W. State Street Meridian; Idaho 83680 ~~~~: (208)888-4312 Fax 888-0323 Watson December 13, 1996 Page 2 of 2 6. The stub street on 13th must be completed with curb and gutter across the end of the existing stub. p~-~ -g+'~ e ; ~„or-~L• -s~c~si, a~ Fzv~ ~,~ l.~ c..K , 7. They believe that NW l lth must be extended through in the future and will require that the City deposit 1/2 the cost of a bridge crossing with ACHD at the time the park is developed. As you can see ACHD's verbal requirements are going to have significant financial impact to this park project. Therefore, I recommend that we submit the enclosed final development plan to ACHD immediately and get a formal written staff report for the City to take action on as soon as possible. Sincerer, ~,~ oLG~?/~- Tim Burgess, P.E. Vice President enc ~ ~ BEFORE THE MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL APPLICATION OF JIM CABBIE AND CABBIE HOMES FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE 15' SET BACK REQUIREMENT IN TAE ZONING ORDINANCE AND FROM THE 35' LANDSCAPE STRIP RE UIREMENT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The above entitled variance request having come on for consideration on December 3, 1996, at approximately 7:30 o'clock p.m. on said date, at the Meridian City Aall, 33 East Idaho Street, Meridian, Idaho, the Applicant's representative, Jerry Wolfe, appearing 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 December 3, 1996, the first publication of which was fifteen (15) days prior to said hearing; that the matter was duly considered at the December 3, 1996, hearing; that copies of all notices were available to newspaper, radio and television stations. 2. That notice of public hearing is required to be sent to property owners within 300 feet of the external boundaries of the land being considered pursuant to 11-2-416 E. , 11-2-419 D. , and 11- 9-612 B. l.b of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian; that his requirement has been met. 3. That the property is zoned General Retail and Service Commercial, C-G, which is defined in the Zoning Ordinance, Section FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 1 ~ ~ 11-2-408 B 11. as follows: " (C-G 1 General Retail and Service Commercial . - The purpose of the (C-G) District is to provide for commercial uses which are customarily operated entirely or almost entirely within a building; to provide for a review of the impact of proposed commercial uses which are auto and service oriented and are located in close proximity to major highway or arterial streets; to fulfill the need of travel-related services as well as retail sales for the transient and permanent motoring public. All such districts shall be connected to [City] ... Water and Sewer ... , and shall not constitute strip commercial development ..." 4. That Ordinance 11-9-605, G., PLANTING STRIPS AND RESERVE STRIPS, for the C-G District, requires that there be a twenty (20) foot planting strip to screen the view from residential properties; that 11-2-410 A requires that in the C-G District property have a 15 foot front set back; that the Comprehensive Plan suggests that properties abutting major arterials have thirty-five (35) feet of landscaping along them. Also, Section 11-2-414 C, LOCATION OF OFF- STREET PARRING, 6., states as follows: Minimum Distance and Setbacks - No part of any parking area for more than ten (10) vehicles shall be closer than twenty feet (20') to any dwelling unit, school, hospital, or other institution for human care located on an adjoining lot unless separated by an acceptably designed screen. If on the same lot with a single-family dwelling, the parking area shall not be located within the front yard required for such building. In no case shall any part of a parking area be closer than four feet (4') to any established street or alley right-of- way. 5. That the Applicant, Jim Carrie and Carrie Homes, has requested that they be granted a variance from the above yard setback requirement to have a five (5) foot yard setback at the proposed property on Fairview Avenue and Barbara Street and requested that he not be required to have thirty-five (35) feet of FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 2 ~ ~ landscaping along Fairview Avenue. 6. The Applicant further stated in the Application that the proposed use would be an office building of 6, 800 square feet; that the property abuts a residential district and a twenty (20) foot setback is required by the Meridian Zoning Ordinance; that due to site constraints addressed in Applicant's Application, Applicant is requesting a reduction of the set back requirement; that in the Application, Applicant additionally requested that the landscape strip adjacent to Fairview Avenue be reduced to five (5) feet instead of the thirty-five (35) feet. 7. That the drawing submitted with Application shows the five ( 5 ) foot rear yard setback; that at the public hearing the Applicant's representative stated that there is a one hundred (100) foot irrigation easement that goes through the center of the property; that there is also a rear yard setback of twenty (20) feet that goes at the rear of the property which leaves hardly any ground to build'on; that normally a piece of ground would allow 10,000 to 12,000 square feet of office building with all of the parking; that the variance would allow the Applicant to build a 6, 800 square foot building with the required parking split as noted in the Applicant's Application; that the Ada County Highway District did not have any problems with the split parking; that the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District didn't have a problem with the layout of parking; that Applicant's representative stated there were no problems with the staff report. 8. That the Meridian Police and Fire Departments and the FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 3 _-~,"1 Central District Health Department may submit comments which shall be incorporated herein, and which would need to be complied with. 9. Councilman Rountree submitted comment regarding the crossing at Five Mile Creek with a bridge for pedestrians so that parking space could be utilized by the facility. 10. Jerry Wolfe additionally commented that the ACHD desired a bridge crossing; that the approval of the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District still needed to be worked out; that regarding the parking and square footage the Applicant desires to work out those matters with the staff before applying for the building permit; that the representative agreed that all requirements could be met. 11. Mayor Corrie presented a question before Jerry Wolfe regarding the bridge and if they are not allowed to build it, then how would they get over to the building. 12. Jerry Wolfe testified that it would have to be walked around; that there is a proposal for a sidewalk; that they are in hopes of building the bridge as they work with Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District. 13. Councilmen Rountree submitted comments in regards to the parking and questioned how that would be met if Applicant was not granted the bridge. 14. Jerry Wolfe again submitted comments in regard to the parking and that there would be no problem in that area. 15. Shari Stiles commented that her main issue would be to make sure they obtain the approval for the pedestrian walkway FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 4 • across Five Mile Creek, prior to getting a building permit; that the ACRD had indicted to her that a sidewalk was not possible at this time; that she 'did submit written comments which are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 16. That the entire property in question is described in the variance application and is incorporated herein as if set forth in full. 17. That the following Ordinance provisions in the Zoning Ordinance are hereby noted: "2-414 OFF-STREET PARKING & LOADING FACILITIES 2-414 A GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1. No building or structure shall be erected, substantially altered or its use changed unless permanently maintained off-street parking and loading spaces have been provided in accordance with the provisions of this Ordinance. 2. Change of Use - When the intensity of use of any building, structure or premises shall be increased through addition of dwelling units, gross floor area, seating capacity [a horizontal unit of width of eighteen inches (18") per seat or other units of measurement specified herein for required parking], or loading facilities, parking and loading facilities as required herein shall be provided for such increase in intensity of use. . . 2-414 C, LOCATION OF OFF-STREET PARKING . . 4. Parking in Setback Area - When abutting another commercial use, parking shall be permitted within the setback area. When abutting residential uses, parking shall not be permitted in the setback area. . . 6. Minimum Distance and Setbacks - No part of any parking area for more than ten (10) vehicles shall be closer than twenty feet (20') to any dwelling unit, school, hospital, or other institution for human care located on an adjoining lot unless separated by an acceptably designed screen. If on the same lot with a single-family dwelling, the parking area shall not be located within the front yard required for such building. In no case shall FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 5 any part of a parking area be closer than four feet (4' ) to any established street or alley right-of- way. 2-414 D, DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING . . 2. Screening, Landscaping and Drainage - a. Landscapinq - Landscaping shall be required for all off-street parking areas for multi- family residential, commercial, industrial and technical developments; b. Under round S rinklin S stems - Underground sprinkling systems shall be required to maintain screening, planting strips, and other landscaping; c. Screening - Whenever a commercial off-street parking area is located in or adjacent to a Residential District, it shall be effectively screened on all sides which adjoin or face any property used for residential uses by a wall, fence, or planting screen that is not less than four feet (4') in height plus a planting strip of four feet (4') minimum width or in an alternate arrangement as approved by the Commission; Suitable landscaping and ground cover shall be provided and maintained on a continuing basis within the planting strip. Planting screens or hedges shall not exceed two feet (2') in height where location is such that sight lines are necessary for vehicular movement across pedestrian ways; At least one (1) tree not less than three inches (3") diameter size class shall be provided for every one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of pavement area; and d. Drainage - A drainage plan designed by an architect or an engineer shall be submitted and required for all off-street parking areas and shall be approved by the City Engineer. 2-414 E SCHEDULE OF PARRING SPACE REQUIREMENTS . . b. Commercial (6) Professional Offices One (1) for each four hundred (400) square feet of gross floor area;" FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 6 • • 18. That the following Ordinance provisions in the Subdivision and Development Ordinance are hereby noted: "9-605 G PLANTING STRIPS AND RESERVE STRIPS Planting strips and reserve strips shall conform to the following: 1. Planting Strips - 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 (20') wide and shall not be a part of the normal street right-of-way or utility easement; ." 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 Subdivision and Development Ordinance 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. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS. OF LAW - Page 7 5. That the specific requirements regarding a variance that must be evidenced and found by the City Council are as follows: "11-9-612 A. 2., FINDINGS: No variance shall be favorably acted upon by the Council unless there is a finding, as a result of a public hearing, that all of the following exist: a. That there are, such special circumstances or conditions affecting the property that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would be clearly impracticable or unreasonable; in such cases, the subdivider shall first state his reasons in writing as to the specific provision or requirement involved; b. That strict compliance with the requirements of this Ordinance would result in extraordinary hardship to the subdivider because of unusual topography, the nature of condition of adjacent development, other physical conditions or other conditions that make strict compliance with this Ordinance unreasonable under the circumstances, or that the conditions and requirements of this Ordinance will result in inhibiting the achievement or objectives of this Ordinance. c. That the granting of the specified variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the area in which the property is situated; d. That such variance will not violate the provisions of the Idaho code; and e. That such variance will not have the effect of nullifying the interest and purpose of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Development Plan. 6. That it is concluded that there does appear to be a specific benefit or profit, economic gain or convenience to the Applicant if the variance of the yard setback and thirty-five foot landscape strip is granted. 7. That it is further concluded that since Section 9-605 G, PLANTING STRIPS AND RESERVE STRIPS, requires that a planting strip be placed next to incompatible features such as highways, railroads, commercial or industrial uses to screen the view from FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 8 • residential properties, that such screening be a minimum of twenty feet (20') wide, and shall not be a part of the normal street right-of-way or utility easement, that there is insufficient space on the Applicant's property to meet Section 11-9-605 G. , and a five foot setback is too much of a reduction from the required twenty feet, and therefore the variance should be denied. 8. That it is further concluded that since Section 2-414 D, DESIGN STANDARDS..,, FOR OFF-STREET PARKING, requires that whenever a commercial off-street parking area is located in or adjacent to a Residential District, that it be effectively screened on all sides which adjoin or face any property used for residential uses by a wall, fence, or planting screen; the wall, fence or planting screen is to be not less than four feet (4') in height plus a planting strip of four feet (4') minimum width; that all off-street parking areas for commercial developments adjacent to residential areas are to be effectively screened on all sides which adjoin or face any property used for residential uses by a wall, fence, or planting screen; that, again, there is insufficient space on the Applicant's property to meet Section 11-2-414 D, DESIGN STANDARDS FOR OFF- STREET PARKING, the reduction in Ordinance requirements is too great, and the variance should be denied. 9. That regarding Section 11-9-612 A. 2., regarding the variance of 11-1-410 A, 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 twenty (20) foot set back Ordinance would clearly be unreasonable; but the reduction of the Ordinance requirements is too great and almost totally FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 9 removes the practicality of the requirements. b. That strict compliance with the requirements of the twenty (20) foot set back Ordinance would not result in extraordinary hardship to the Applicant since even though strict compliance would restrict development, the requested changes to the Ordinance are to drastic. c. That the granting of a variance would',be detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to the public. d. That the variances would have the effect of altering the interests and purposes of the twenty (,20) foot set back Ordinance which is included in the Zoning Ordinance. 10. That it is further concluded that variances of the rear yard setbacks have been allowed in other commercial developments but where they have been granted the improvements were not as great a change as Applicant is requesting. 11. That the thirty-five foot landscape strip, as allowed in the Meridian Comprehensive Plan, has been uniformly required for developments along Fairview Avenue and it should be applied in this case and a drop from 35 feet to five feet would, be unreasonable. 12. That it is concluded that the variances of 11-2-410 A, 11-9-605 G. , and the thirty-five foot landscape strip should not be granted to the Applicant. FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 10 • APPROVAL OF FINDIN~38 OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The City Council of the City of Meridian does hereby adopt and approve these Findings of Fact and Conclusions. ROLL CALL: MAYOR CORRIE .(TIE BREAKER) VOTED COUNCILMAN MORROW VOTED COUNCILMAN TOLSMA VOTED COUNCILMAN ROUNTREE VOTED COUNCILMAN BENTLEY VOTED DECISION That it is decided the Application for a variance from 11-2- 410 A, 11-9-605 G., and the thirty-five foot landscape strip, should not be granted to the Applicant, and the Application is denied. APPROVED. DISAPPROVED: FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - Page 11 • MEMORANDUM OF THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 17th day of December,. 1996, by and between the law firm of AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOICSTON, hereinafter referred to as the "Firm," and the City of Meridian, hereinafter referred to 'as the "City;" W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the City desires to house attorneys and secretarial staff who perform legal work for the City at' the office of the Firm, and the Firm desires to allow the City to ,house attorneys and secretarial staff who perform legal work for the City at its office; and WHEREAS, it is the purpose of this MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT to set forth expressly the understanding and agreement by and between the Firm and the City for the City to house attorneys and secretarial staff who perform legal work for the City at the office of the Firm, and for the Firm to allow the City to house attorneys and secretarial staff who perform legal work for the City at its office; NOW, THEREFORE, for. and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration given, the parties hereto, have agreed and this does hereby memorialize their agreement as follows: 1. Commencing on the date hereof, the Firm and the City hereby agree that the City may house not more than three (3) attorneys and two (2) secretaries who perform legal work for the City at the Firm's office, commonly known as 1530 W. State, Suite C., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; hereinafter ',referred to as the "Office." 2. The City agrees to pay the Firm and the Firm agrees to accept ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED THIRTY AND 00/100 DOLLARS ($1,230.00) per month for each attorney performing legal work for the City and housed at the Office, which sum is'due and payable nn later than the 15th day of each month of the attorney(s) occupancy of or presence at the Office. 3. The City hereby specifically acknowledges and agrees that it is responsible to provide and for the acquisition, purchase, and expense of any and all necessary office equipment, fixtures and furnishings for the attorneys and secretarial staff performing legal work for the City and housed at the Office; it being specifically understood and agreed by and between the parties hereto that the Firm is neither responsible for nor obligated to provide any type of office equipment, fixtures o,r other furnishings MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT - Page 1. • for the attorneys and secretarial staff performing legal work for the City and housed at the Office. 4. The City hereby specifically acknowledges and agrees that it is responsible and liable for the payment of any and all compensation, benefits, taxes, licensing fees, continuing legal education fees and other costs, expenses and liabilities arising from, connected to or associated with the attorney(s) and secretarial staff performing legal work for the City and housed at the Office. 5. Subject to paragraph 3. and paragraph 4., immediately hereinabove, the Firm agrees to pay the rent, ',utilities, supplies and general overhead expenses associated with the operation of the Office; provided, however, the Firm shall bill and the City shall pay each month for all photocopies, at the rate of $0.10 per page, and all facsimile transmissions, whether sent or received, at the rate of $1.00 per page, relating or pertaining to the City's legal work. 6. The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that attorneys of the Firm have private practices, and that the attorney(s) and secretarial staff performing legal work for the City and housed at the Office shall not possess and do not possess authority or permission to access or examine the private client files of the attorneys of the Firm. Wayne G. Crookston, Jr.'shall be designated as the Supervising Attorney of the City, and shall have authority and control over the attorney(s) and secretarial staff performing legal work for the City and housed at the Office. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands the day and year first above written. \\``\``~``i,~ ~ I~ n~. `"V,/'fill ~,~ ~o `: ~.~-L approved by'"~~+r, ~,~~P~~~n'L'il 12-17-96 ~~~~ Atteste ~it~G~ City Clerk AMBROSE, FITZGERALD & CROOKSTON B V ~' Y Joh 0. Fitzger , II. .MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT - Page 2. The City of Meridian • • MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996: rr~prove. MINUTES OF SPEICAL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 3, 1996: ~~O~Irov~ MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD DECEMBER 10, 1996: QPprove~ 1. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 1996: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-G BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: C'en~ihwe- .~/l~ ,C-~- ~~n , 2 / s~~ / 417 hi t~' 2. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19; 1996: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHEVRON C-STORE, MCDONALDS WITH DRIVE THRU, AND A HOTEL BY EAGLE PARTNERS LLC: ~,,,f,^~, ue p/f/ ~-~'i ~~n . 21~~ /~~7 f~-~ 3. ORDINANCE #748 - TAMURA/BERRY ANNEXATION - I-L ~ C-G: u~vv~rvve, 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BY DOUG TAMURA AND ARTHUR BERRY; TABLED DECEMBER 3,1996: 5. AMENDED ORDINANCE #731 - OLSON-BUSH NO.211-L: a~ppro~~ 6. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR VARIANCE FOR CARRIE OFFI E BUILDING BY JIM CARRIE: G~Pp/'o vC ~~~ ~ e L t~~lro vC ~!eCr~~'on) - ~E'h~ 7. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO C-C BY CHERRY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: 8. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT FOR FIRST STREET PLAZA BY CHEF~RY PLAZA ASSOCIATES: ~~~ ~e ~/~f ~ ~a~nn, 7=-, 197 -•.. 9. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A NEWIUSED R.V. SALES/ SERVICE FACILITY BY ZAMZOWS: L'i~~a.fto~n~ ~ ~Y~pare~ new ~'~~ ~ ~~L 10. REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY BY WESTERN PCS It CORP.: ~t~prrav~ -~'l~ ~ e~C a~pra~~e cCeG~•s~~~ 11. MARTY GOLDSMITH: DISCUSSION OF SALMON RAPIDS PHASE 3: ~` (r9h~.hrc.e dilcuJsib>• .~, Jam. 2l ~ l X97 l~i~, 12. MOUNTAIN VIEW EQUIPMENT COMPANY: REQUEST HOOKUP TO CITY WATER AT 700 W. OVERLAND ROAD: 13. LAND LEASE AGREEMENT WITH L:J. RANCHES: ~~p~ove~ 14. RENEWAL OF BEER/WINE/LIQUOR LICENSES FOR 1997: u-~~orov~ 15. BEER AND WINE LICENSE FOR WEBAIR LLC: o.~~ro/~ w~'~-/~ C'hfe~ C-rv~dah!r ~~prr~va~' 16. DEPARTMENT REPORTS: A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER: 1. STATUS OF ALBERTSON/LOVAN EASEMENT AGREEMENT FOR WATER/SEWER LINE: .~-~a-t~s ?? B. MAYOR CORRIE: 1. HISTORICAL PRESERVATION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS: CITY OF MERIDIAN PUB~C MEETING SIGN-IJ~SHEET NAME PHONE NUMBER ~~~~ ~ ~t1r ~-~Se~ dog-~-~2-R~-~' CITY OF MERIDIAN PUB MEETING SIGN-U~SHEET .~ ., -_ ~, - _ . _ .,.,j... ( ~~~_ ORDINANCE NO. ~ ~~ \-~~!~~~ ~ C~~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING ANDL~T~111(s ~R~'A~N~= ~ ~ REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS THE EAST 1/2 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 7 and a portion of the W 1/2 SW 1/4 SW 1/4 of; Section _8`=-T-.- - -- 3 N. , R. 1 E. , B.M. , MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY IDAHO; AND;-=PROVIDING AN~` -' i EFFECTIVE DATE. / GDU 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: PARCEL ONE A parcel of land being a portion of the E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7 ar~d a portion of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap marking the Southwest corner of the said Section 8, also said point being the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along the South boundary of the said E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7 South 89°19'46" West 663.58 feet to a point marking the Southwest corner of the said E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7; thence along the .West boundary of the said E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7 North 00°02'01" East 590.04 feet to a point; thence leaving the said West boundary along a line Northerly of and parallel with the South boundary of the said E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7 North 89°19'46" East 663.20 feet to a point on the West boundary of the said W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8; thence along the said West boundary. North 00°00'12" West 145.29 feet to a point; thence leaving the said West boundary North 89°59'48" East 661.59 feet to a point on the East boundary of the. said W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8; thence along the said East boundary South 00°01'08" West 730.88 feet to a point marking. the ORDINANCE - TAMtJRA/BERRY. Page 1 Southeast corner of the said W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8; thence along the South boundary of the said W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8 South 89°36'43" West 661.32 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. AND PARCEL TWO A parcel of land being a portion of the E 1/2 of the E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7 and a portion of the W 1/2 of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., H.M., Meridian, Ada County, Idaho and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at a brass cap marking the Southwest corner of the said Section 8; thence along the West boundary of the said W 1/2 of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8 North 00°00'12" West 40.00 feet to an iron pin on the North right-of-way line of East Franklin Road; thence along the said North right-of-way line South 89°19'46" West 663.55 feet to a point on the West boundary of the said E 1/2 of the E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7; thence along the said West boundary North 00°02'01" East 550.04 feet to a point, also said point being the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing North 00°02'01" East 759.64 feet to a point on the centerline the Union Pacific Railroad; thence leaving the said West boundary along the said centerline South 88°56'00" East 1324.71 feet to a point on the-East boundary of the said W 1/2 of the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 8; thence along the said East boundary South 00°01'08" West 581.90 feet to a point; thence leaving the said East boundary- South 89°59'48" West 661.59 feet to a point on the East boundary of the said E 1/2 of the E 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of Section 7; thence along the said East boundary South 00°00'12" East 145.29 feet to a point; thence leaving the said East boundary along a line Northerly of and parallel with the South boundary of the said SE 1/4 of Section 7 South 89°19'48" West 663.20 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and PARCEL ONE shall be zoned General Retail & Service Commercial (C-G); and PARCEL TWO shall be zoned Light Industrial (I-L); 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 the Applicant shall pay ORDINANCE - TAMURA/BERRY Page 2 ~~ any impact development fee or transfer fee adopted by the City of Meridian as a condition of annexation and if not paid the land shall be de-annexed. 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 the development shall be aesthetically maintained with a 35-foot setback for landscaping along Franklin and Locust Grove Roads. d. That, as a condition of annexation, the Applicant shall enter into a development agreement as authorized by 11-2- 416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the development agreement shall address the following, among other items: 1. Inclusion into the subdivision of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G., H 2, K, L, and M, of the Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian. 2. The Applicant and owners of the property, and if required, any assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives, pay, when required, any impact development fee or transfer fee adopted by .the City. e. 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. f. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the Applicant, the titled owners,'and their assigns. g. That if these conditions of approval are not met the property shall be subject to de-annexation. h. Meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and'meet the Ordinances of ORDINANCE - TAMURA/BERRY Page 3 the City of Meridian. Section 3. That if the Applicant shall fail to meet the above conditions the property shall be subject to de-annexation, which conditions subsequent shall run with 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 ~ day of December, 1996. APPROVED: i y -- BOB CORRIE d1TTE \`tt~utttir~alti~~~ WILLIAM G. BERG, R -- Cz~`` ~ ~ ~ ~ rf~ - ~,~a ~ 9 ORDINADiCE - TAMLJRA/BERRY ''% .~- ~~,~ 3g~ ,~'? .,~';;°~ Pa e 4 '+~ t~ ~a . ~ Sri... ~.~i1~~S~ `~~~. ~'~'~t~irrtt is ttit~ti~b~ ~ ~ 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 THE EAST 1/2 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 SECTION 7 and a portion of the W 1/2 SW 1/4 SW 1/4 of Section 8, T. 3 N., R. 1 E., B.M., MERIDIAN,- ADA COUNTY IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE," passed as Ordinance No.748, by-the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the /7~1 day of December, 1996, as the~same appears in my office.. `~~~~~11i1i11tflte~g DATED this ~ day of December, 1996. 4~,,,"`~`',,,c °~'~'",~, ~. ~^~,, `' ~ ~ 'go ity Clerk, City f M®ri i~an ~~ Ada County, Idaho ,~ ,, ,~. STATE OF IDAHO, ) f~ere~ta~ow ee9~;~'~''~ ss. County of Ada, ) On this ~ day of December, 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. ~~~~~~~~s~ss,,,~~ ~~~a`{-~ ~ ~... ~ pry SEAh,: °~, ~' , ~. , ~' ,~, OT ~b r~,~' ~ ~ ~. ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ n ~ r~ '~~~1~11111ti1i ORDINANCE - TAMURA/BERRY ublic for Idaho at Meridian, Idah ssion Expires 0 0.2 Page 5 -! I ! O I I II ~~ h I i III I I I~ i ~nll 1 I I III I I Ip~I 1 I'0 Ii~ ~ m I ~Ilhl YU N 1 5 ~ i III I I 1 mJ I ill I 1 '~i I ` ~ II I 1 i I n ^ i I '~ !II I I Z III I I ~~-I I i II I I II m I ~ ~ III I I 1 Z I ~ ~ I~ Jim I i" II N I + ~ ; II 11 II I I ~ 11 i i ~n ++- ~ """iiiIl ~I I ~ i II ~ ;III I II N I I III II jll I I N III d II I III T I ail II ~ II I I 111 I III ~ 1 I !III r-~ -_ _I gill I11 II 1 1 1 1 r - ~. ~I ' I n I i I i \~ I I i \ ` I I I I I I YI 11 ~ C I Q ~I I 1 4 I ~~ i 1 1 I I I I 1 l I I I I i I II ~ I I I ~/\Va.I 1JIIJV 1 ,Qy•~C/ i,1,~Y~/,/~oy19 S I I =/ 4V vGL I- ~ III h I 1~ ; I I II , ~ I 1 II i ~ I I ~ Y " ~ I ~' ~ i I~ II I I I I C~ ~ I I I II 1 I ~~ 8 .1 I e$$ I i Il~ v II i ~ i I _ ~ ~ N. it p ; / ~ ~ $ V "1 I II z ~ ~ I II 41 I ~ - p iII I it ~ ~ ~ ~ r j i III` I Iw 1 ~~ ~p aNN N ~ ~~ I II iL ~w $~ ~ ~~ I- b ~ I ^ D II 8 ~ aaf ~ ~ $ 3 ~~ I~ I`I ~.u ~ ~ ~ ~~ .~~ ~ II ~ I ~~ f II ~~ W ~. 1 ,~i 69L ,$vo~g ta'o69 '~„/o,ao,cn IV I I 1 I 11 fi 11 I ~ 1 III i II .% ~ ~ ~ I ~~ I j l/ ~ ~ ~ 11 ~~ jl / ~ ~ i 11= 1 i ,, ~ f ~ ~ y ,. ic. .~ ., .~ ., ~~ 1:~1 U ~_F I: . . r .l - -.~,t.1 :1 iJ AMENDED ORDINANCE NO. 7_ 31 ~~1 w ..- ::. ~ _ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING A'1~ ~tQ~~ ~~-~ REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANEE 1_EA$T,~B_Q~,._~ MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EF~CTIVE DAT rat'' WHEREAS, the City Council and the Ma or of ~~Uo '~ y 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 l 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 8, Township 3 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast Corner of said Section 8, thence along the southerly line of said Section 8 South 89°32'00" West a distance of 871.18 feet to a point, thence leaving said southerly line North 00°28'00"West a distance of 520.14 feet, to the Southwesterly Corner of Olson and Bush Industrial Park, said corner being the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence North 89°02'00" West a distance of 1015.07 feet to a point; Thence North 06°08'31" West a distance of 806.01 feet to a point on the northerly right-of-way of the Union Pacific Railroad; Thence along said northerly right-of-way South 89°02'00" East a distance of 1094.80 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly right-of-way and along the westerly boundary of said Olson and Bush Industrial Park and the northerly extension thereof South 00°28'00" East a distance of 800.06 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and shall be zoned I-L Light Industrial; that the annexation and zoning is subject to the ANNE%ATION ORDINANCE - I-L R-2 DEVELOPMENT\OLSON AND BUSg INDUSTRIAL PARK NO. 2 Page 1 . ~ ~ i ~- 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 project of the requirements of 11-9-605 C, G 1, H, 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, 11-9-60.5 M. which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways, and 11-9-606 B 14. which pertains to pressurized irrigation. e. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind the Applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns. f. That the Applicant shall meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and meet the Ordinances of the City of Meridian. Section 3 . That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of the legal description, and map, which shall plainly and clearly designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission within ten (10) days following the effective date of this Ordinance. ANNEBATION ORDINANCE - I-L R-2 DEVELOPMENT\OLSON AND BUSS INDUSTRIAL PARR NO. 2 Page 2 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 17th day of December, 1996. -- ROBERT D. CORRIE ATTEST: ` ~~~i e~ ~ ,~r~ ~ ``~` ~ ~~ ~~• ~ `, ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ /J .++~- Y~ ~.. Y ~ r~ WILLIAM G. BERG, - CITY CLERL4 ~~~.~.o ~y '~ ~ ~` STATE OF IDAHO 1 ~, ' % ~~ ~~T 1"~"~ • ~°~ ."`~ County of Ada, ) ~'!' ~~"'~fe~~~ ~ ~. ,:~~;°~~ 3 , ~1Fklr I, WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., City Clerk of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of an Ordinance entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING .AND ZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 8, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 EAST, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE."; passed as Amended Ordinance No. 731, by the City Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the 17th day of December, 1996, as the same appears in my office. DATED this 17th -day of December, 1996. ,~.*''~~1~1~5'~rr!`r~,~1'r~lr~P ~«~'o .~ City Clerk, City f eridia ~ Ada County, Idaho .~ .,~. ' ,~ ~, y~ ~° /Y~/~~~~) r~~ 1~ it + ;~~0 ~'f~~A'?d'i,_ sq;$11~°~'~"~~ ANNEBATION ORDINANCE - I-L R-2 DEVELOPMENT\OLSON AND BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK NO. 2 Page 3 STATE OF IDAHO,) ss. County of Ada, ) On this 17th day of December, 19.96, 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 WAEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above written. SEAL ~`,,N~eao^e©vaaAr~a P' ~ ~ • ~ gs 'A'~~w" ~y. ' w ~~ ~~ as A ~~~~BIAAipAA~mE y Public for Idaho ing at Meridian, Idah ommission Expires ANNEBATION ORDINANCE - I-L R-2 DEVELOPMENT\OLSON AND BUSH INDUSTRIAL PARK NO. 2 Page 4 -~ i i iii - ~I I I 1111 1 I I I I I I I ii~~ ~ II ~ I - I Il~ I p ~; 1 I III I I N ~ 11 li I l i 1 I I I I I r Ilm I III N ~~ I IIII I ~ 1 1 Ilj I II 1,, C I II i ~ I ~I l i I I ~ I ~ ~ III; 1 "'I J 3R~~ II I 4" I'I ~] I I II ~ 1 I _ I O 11 II~ I ~ ~ N I I - I III (/ I z 1 C ~ 1 I I I p m ~ ~~ I ;~~ ~ 1 ~ iRm~i I i i ~- i • I ~ I~I I I III I 1 ' I ' '~ I I 111 ~ I m N ~ I I I n I -G I i I I 1~ I I I III I I Ili 1 z I I I I 1 I I pj _ ~ I + i I I I / ~' I ~ , I Ili ~ I i I I 1 Ili ~ I i~7I r /\1 1 I IIi ~ I I IIi ~ i 7y75,F 'i m ~ I l l N~ I 1 II! I I _. 1 1 II ~ I ~I I I I I III 1 j ~ I 1~ i IIII(I}p~~1E~II( I III ~ I 4 i \ Vi I ; ~ I i Aryl I 1 \\ ! J I I II' I i I I I~j I 1 I I IIi i I I I I I III I + l I I ~~ I I 11 Ilj p I 1 I i I N. 1HONASi I 1 I ~-- I IIi I I ~__ .~_~ I I 1 ._._ ~- ~` I I ui ~ I ~ . ~` I I u ~ I I III ~L'Y i~ ~: ~. I 1 / \ rte. j1'g.. .. _... I I I ~ I I I ~ •i ti I I i `. I 1 i ~ I \ I II ~~~ I i u y r I .._-._._..- I I, iH ~ 1 l n I I ~~oQ _ --- ~ - ` 11 n,I i c c I I i // ,IE~ . I I I 1 1 ~ ~ ~ Iv I I I - (i I I __. _.._-__-. I I I /~~ IS5~~ II I i ki ~ ~ ~ ' / ,~ n~ Gb°pg's~ W i j '~ i I , --- I - II I I ~ I I ; I I I I y I ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ m ~ ~, I z , 1 I 1 II T // ~ I o ~ ~~ $ ~ v v II ~ ~ I -- ~ I I II ' I II I ll ~ n I I II ii Ir1l .. LIIV 1 I ' I\ ?6' . 690. d4' s. mo° 28 be'E. 8co. ob' I l I I II I' II \ .. YIPp~gygnn II i I I ~ g4q.V44B4: ~ aai - 0 1 I\ ~ Ri ~~Ytltlp:~~": O I I I i ~I \ ~ ~' pfd pp,.,.,.,, I I i I i \ j ~'Pyy~~~~a?~~~ 1 F d EE• aka. p d- ss 71 ~ .Z i i I \ ~ 1~ • Ii F, I I i 1 i \\ I IDt~a~ii~~~~ Si W 11 i \ ~ 5FV ~IIY c , I Ag ~~~~~~ ~~xs mm N i I ~ ~9a - ~ yl i 1 I I F F m 1 I I V~` I I , I~ I I I .I l~ 1 I 11 I - ~______________ ~ ~ 1 I I i - I I I ______________ I 1 ze I I I ~__-_-__-_- I I I a i --- -__----_~ --_ _, pp EAGLE - -----ROAD------ ----- a ~ Roylance & Associates P.A. Engineers • Surveyors • Landplanners 4619 Emerald. Suite D-2, Boise, Idaho 83706 Telephone (208) 336-7390 Fax (208) 336-7391 October 15, 1996 Project No. 1677 REVISED DECEMBER 9, 1996 Legal Description for R2 Development Annexation of Olsen and Bush Industrial Park No. 2 19.37 Acre Tract RECEiVE1D [~ ~ C 1 1 i996 N~lDIAN CITY ENGINEER A tract of land situated in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 8, Township 3 North, Kaige 1 East, Boise Meridian, Ada Counfy, Idaho, described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast Corner of'said Section 8, thence along the southerly line of said Section 8 South 89°-32'-QO" West a distance of 871. l 8 feet to a point, thence leaving said southerly line North 00°-28'-00" West a distance of 520.14 feet, to the Southwesterly Corner of Olson and Bush Industrial Park, said corner being the POINT OF BEGINNING. Thence North 89°-0l'-00" West a distance of 1015.07 feet. to a point; Thence North 06°-08'-31" West a distance of 806.01 feet to a point on the northerly right-of--way of the Union Pacific Railroad; Thence along said northerly right-of--way South 89°-02'-UU" East a distance of 1094.80 feet to a point; Thence leaving said northerly right-of=way and along the westerly boundary of said Olson and Bush Industrial Park and the northerly extension thereof South 00°-28'-00" East a distance of 800.06 feet to the FOIN'T OF BEGINNING. The above described tract of land contains 19.37 acres, more or less, subject to all existing easements and rights-of--way. Tlus legal was prepared from data of record and not an actual field survey. Prepared By: ROYLANCE ANll ASSOCIATES P.A. 4619 EMERALD SUITE D-2 BOISE IDAHO 83706 208 336-7390 ~.c FAY 208 336-7391 ~~ ~~ ._, ~~ z:\wordle:tt11677\1 cga1.612 October 1 S, 1996 Project lr1a. 1677 l~Vi$ED DECF.MBLaR 4, 1'996 L,e:gd >~bsctiptian for 1R2 Dover t Aru-eacatloa of Olsen and Bush ustriat Park No. 2 l9.37 Acre Tract A loot of lend Rttuated to Southeast 1/4 of Secttdtt 8, Townstup 3 Nortt4 Rage ! , >8oise Meridian, Courtly, Idaho, desc~bed as follows: Gatltmencing at the South~ast Cottmr of said Section 8, thence a;ang the southerly 19ne of ' Raid Secuon 8 South 89°-32'-00" iWeRt a distance of 872.18 feet to a Iwim, thence leaving said southerly title North o0°-28'-00" eat a distance of 520. t4 feet, to the Southwesterly Garner of Olsen and sash industrial Park, id corner bung the POINT OF >BCCiYNN1NG. Ro~lance & AssQG~Clt9S P;A. Eh0inaers • Surveycxs • Lo~ndplanners lt'.1i1 (iierorAlc- SVr1d vZ BJI~A Ic7~hC1 6J~lk+~~' 1 •~-'~~~L..." i i ielbphon~ (208) 337900 Fax {2081336.73v1 Thettc~e North 89°-x'-00" 7`hence Nonh 06°-oa'-3l" r~1u-of-wny a~f the Ilruan Thence along acid norther l091~.tt0 feet to;point; i~heJnee leaving acid north and Bush Industrial Parlr t dist#~troe Of 800.06 feet tb The above ~scrlbed tract easemcr-ts atnd rights-ot way. 'I'hi1 legal was prepared 1 j 1 Propared Hj-: i i:hrrardte~ot11o77Ytatl.bt~ West a distance of 1015.47 ftpet to a point; West a distance of806.01 fact to a paint an the northerly ~aci8c Railrasld; y r~ht-af--way South 89°-02'-00" Fast a diRtance of right-of--way and along the westerly boundary of said Olson lire northerly ~ctptsipn thereo#' South 00°-28'-00" Last a POINT OF BEGINNi1VG. land contains 19.37 sores, mare ar leas, subject to all dusting data of record and trot an actuart field survey. ROYLANCE AND ASSOCi~lti'LS P.A. 4619 F,~_R Ai ]-i S(JfI'E. D-~ BOISIr It~AHO 83706 208 33b-?390 FAX 208 33b-7391 Minute Bor'- ,Commissioners, Acs County, Idaho Open Seasion,December 16, 1996 a,D. 19 BOARD OF ADA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MINUTES OF THE OPEN MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1996 10:00 AM The Board of Ada County Commissioners met this date in Open Session in the Commissioners' Conference Room of the Ada County Administration Building to discuss the Meridian area of impact. Staff members present: Patricia Nilsson and Jeff Patlovich, Development Services. Minutes Recorder: Kelly W. May. IN THE MATTER OF CALL TO ORDER• Commissioner Vernon L. Bisterfeldt called the meeting of the Ada County Commissioners to order at 10:00 AM. IN THE MATTER OF ROLL CALL: In attendance were Commissioners Vernon L. Bisterfeldt, Roger Simmons and Gary Glenn. Also Present: Mayor Bob Corrie, Jim Johnson, Glenn Bentley, Tracey Parsons, Wayne Cookston, Charles Rountree, Shari Styles, Will Berg, Ted Johnson, Walt Morrow, Franlc Walker. B. Corrie explained that they were meeting today to try to open a dialogue of issues to discuss for area of impact negotiations. He noted that the Meridian area of impact has not yet been approved by the Commissioners. He received a memo from Ada County's Development Services staff regarding the County's interest in this topic and Meridian would like to facilitate approval. G. Glenn asked a question regarding the number of years it would take to provide services to the northern corridor in the proposed area of impact. B. Corrie indicated that he anticipates afive-year period. He noted that the Ada County Comprehensive Plan discourages leap-frog boundaries for growth because of the added expense. V. Bisterfeldt asked if the northern corridor was too far out and beyond the time for Meridian to make services available to them. B. Corrie said no. He maintained that the topography of the land dips toward the west and south which would facilitate gravity flow toward Meridian. V. Bisterfeldt explained that he is concerned about the situation because it seems similar to Boise moving into the southeast area without services. The Commissioners would prefer to make decisions about the areas of impact based the on the availability of services rather than politics. B. Corrie suggested that many people in that area associate more with the city of Meridian than Boise City. G. Smith, Meridian's city engineer, discussed the availability of services to the northern corridor. He said they could provide gravity sewer for most of the section, but he does not know how long it would take to infill the area. G. Glenn asked if the eastern-most portion of the northern corridor would be at the end of the sewer line and would be the last to receive services. Minute Bool~_, Commissioners, Ada County, Idaho Open December 16, 1996 Session, A.D. 19 G. Smith said that decision would probably have to be a political, not technical one. He thought the area would probably receive services last because it would be the most cost effective to expand outward. B. Cowie admitted that they will not bring the sewer into the area until it is developed and populated. V. Bisterfeldt pointed out that the growth pattern will probably be east to west and that Meridian may have to rethink their plan. B. Cowie said that they wish to have orderly development to protect against urban sprawl. G. Smith showed where the sewer lines and other services currently exist in Meridian. The area to the west could be fed by gravity eventually. If Meridian tried to hook the area up to the current, closer sewer line they would have to install a pump. He commented that regardless of the engineering possibilities, some people identify with Meridian, some ii identify with Boise, and some don't care. B. Cowie brought up the issue of the Kevin Howell property and whether that could be served by gravity-flow sewer. R. Simmons asked about the proposed skating rink and learned that the area was to the east of the Howell property. He also asked about the availability of other services including fire stations and parks. He asked about park impact fees. B. Cowie said that five parks are planned in their current area of impact in accordance with the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. V. Bisterfeldt explained that he is more concerned with the extension of the impact area past Amity road than the issue of the northern corridor. He feared another growth situation similar to southwest Boise. B. Cowie contended that he viewed the northern corridor as more critical. He feels that area will probably develop sooner and is more accessible for services. V. Bisterfeldt said that he felt Meridian was asking for the northern corridor in an effort to block Boise, and admitted that in a similar situation he would do the same. He would like to place some time restriction on the area of impact agreement which would revert the land back to. the County if Meridian did not provide services in a timely manner. R. Simmons asked about public transportation currently available and if there were plans for bus service. B. Cowie replied that Meridian is trying to negotiate with Boise to bring public transportation services to Meridian. R. Simmons also asked if Meridian had any plans to increase fire protection. B. Cowie named the three to four stations that are planned in.the Meridian Comprehensive Plan. They are negotiating with Boise to share services by Ten Mile Road. He reiterated that this process will depend on the growth, which they are trying to manage to make sure Meridian grows from the inside of the city limits outward. R. Simmons asked if the proper term would be control or manage. He also would like to make his decision based on services. He added that he does not want Meridian to be surrounded by Boise and have a Garden City effect. Minute Bool~_, Commissioners, Ada County, Idaho Open Sesaion,December 16, 1996 a.D. 19 B. Corrie admitted that if it came down to economics, Boise could get services to the area in question more quickly. He contended, however, that Meridian's planning has had greater strength given to the northern side than the southern. Meridian's development is, of course, demand-based in that respect. V. Bisterfeldt outlined the issues that need to be taken into consideration for the Commissioners' decision. G. Glenn said he is concerned about the people living in the affected areas and how their property would be impacted. He asked if the people in the northeast would have to wait for sewer if the other areas did not develop first. B. Corrie expressed concern that if they encourage east to west growth it will impact schools, transportation, and facilitate urban sprawl. Meridian wiil try to manage that to keep it from growing east to west. Mayor Corrie believes that Boise will not want to service that area because they will have to pump sewage. He knows Meridian will have to make some difficult decisions based on the need for orderly growth. V. Bisterfeldt asked for the opportunity to allow Meridian to gain their proposed area of impact with the stipulation that they would guarantee services within a specific amount of time or the land would come back to the County. He also wanted a commitment to get the sewer and a fire station in the northern area. B. Corrie would want the Council to speak to that issue. C. Rountree said that he thinks V. Bisterfeldt's approach was reasonable but did not want too much restraint. W. Morrell agreed with C. Rountree, but suggested it may be in the public's best interest for the County to look at the impact areas on a periodic basis, recognizing that the period will have to be long enough to allow the services to come in. G. Bentley agreed that the timetable could be worked out on these issues. If Boise came in it would erode the base of Meridian taxpayers. R. Simmons realized that eventually they would have to finally draw the line, but he's not ready to do that for Boise's western boundary yet. He said that Boise had not requested the area yet but thinks they will if they can service by gravity-flow sewer. He said he is not, however, ready to give Boise the whole northern corridor. He would like something in writing about sewer and population projections. B. Corrie explained that the growth projections were forthcoming. C. Rountree pointed out that the Meridian boundaries were based on a planned, managed growth approach. He did not want development to control growth. He is concerned about the attitude that whoever gets sewer there first will get the northern corridor. R. Simmons responded that they can manage growth to an extent but they also need to work with developers rather than tell them where they can and can't build. T. Johnson pointed out that Meridian sewer will take a long time to extend to the area unless something significant changes. He just wants sewer and doesn't care which city he is in. He expects that it will be more like 20-25 years before Meridian can get sewer to the area. B. Corrie said he did not want to rush the sewer unless they know they will get the money back. MinutC Book, Commissioners, Ada County, Idaho Open Session December 16, 1996 a .D. 19 R. Simmons asked about the treatment capacity of the present sewer. W. Morrow said that they are currently doubling plant capacity and will double it again after that is completed. He feels they will have capacity available in a reasonably short period of time. R. Simmons said he would like to have that in writing. V. Bisterfeldt asked about new schools. B. Corrie said that four elementary schools are on the map and others are in the planning stage. R. Simmons said he would like to see the study done on January 7, then see if Boise City would like to plan a joint meeting with Meridian and Ada County. ACTION: R. SIMMONS MOVED TO TABLE THIS ITEM TO 1/14/97 AT 1:30 PM. V. BISTERFELDT SECONDED. G. Glenn made a substitute motion to table the meeting until January 8, 1997. The motion died for the lack of a second. R. Simmons called for the question. ACTION: V. BISTERFELDT, AYE; R. 5IMMONS, AYE; G. GLENN, NAY. THE MOTION CARRIED. IN THE MATTER OF ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, the meeting was recessed at 10:45 AM.. Vernon L. Bisterfeldt, Cha' an ATTEST: Ada County Clerk