HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 08-05
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1997:
(APPROVED)
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1997:
(APPROVED)
1. CONDITIONS FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT:
(APROVED)
2. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION: (TABLED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2, 1997)
3. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 -COMMISSIONS, BOARDS,
COMMITTEES: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 19, 1997)
4. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 - TRAFFIC SAFETY
COMMISSION: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 19, 1997)
5. TABLED JULY 15, 1997: FINAL PLAT FOR CROSSROADS SUBDIVISION
NO. 6, 37 LOTS BY RAMON & MARILYN YORGASON: (TABLED UNTIL
AUGUST 19, 1997)
6. ORDINANCE #765 - SAUNDERS REZONE: (APPROVED)
7. ORDINANCE #766 - HANSEN ANNEXATION: (APPROVED)
8. FINAL PLAT FOR GRANITE CREEK SUBDIVISION, 23 LOTS AND A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY KEVIN HOWELL CONSTRUCTION:
(APPROVED}
9. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR DAKOTA RIDGE
SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR BENITON
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: (CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF
FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
11. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-O BY
MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N. CINDER ROAD: (APPROVED
FINDINGS; APPROVED DECISION; CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE
ORDINANCE)
12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
NEW CHURCH BUILDING BY MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N.
CINDER ROAD: (APPROVED FINDINGS; APPROVED DECISION)
13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 48.7
ACRES TO R-4 BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF
VICTORY ROAD: (APPROVED FINDINGS; APPROVE DECISION; CITY
ATTORNEY TO PREPARE ANNEXATION ORDINANCE)
14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF
LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF VICTORY ROAD: (TABLED UNTIL AUGUST
19, 1897)
15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: (TABLED
UNTIL SEPTEMBER 2, 1887)
16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-4 BY
MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.: (APPROVED FINDINGS;
APPROVED DECISION; CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW)
17. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
(TABLED UNTIL AUGUST 18, 1887)
18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR- HAVEN. COVE
SUBDIVISION NO. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.: (CITY
ATTORNEY TO PREPARE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW)
19. REQUEST FOR HOOK UP TO CITY SEWER FOR 3195 N. CINDER BY GARY
& MARGARET PALMER: (TABLED TO AUGUST 19, 1997)
20. PACKARD SUBDIVISION -LIFT STATION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT:
(APPROVED)
21. LATE COMERS AGREEMENT WITH STOR-MOR SYSTEMS INC. AND
TREASURE VALLEY BAPTIST CHURCH: (APPROVED)
22. WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: (APPROVED)
23. APPROVE BILLS: (APPROVED}
24. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
A. GARY SMITH, CITY ENGINEER:
1. KELLER-REED BUILDING PERMIT:
2. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT FOR ACRD:
(APPROVED)
B. CHARLIE ROUNTREE, CITY COUNCILMAN:
1. BUDGET ADJUSTMENT FOR SOFTBALL FIELD: (APPROVED)
25. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1997 - 7:30 P.M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1997: ~~~l~~tii~t~
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1997: ~-%41?'"= `"''~
1. CONDITIONS FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION NO. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT: -'~~' ~~'~~'~~
2. TABLED JULY 1, 1987: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION: 1ai~~r1 t~~~ :7i}?t~_,.~h~~ -~ ~`%`~ ~
3. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 -COMMISSIONS, BOARDS,
CQMMITTEES: "I cL~~uc~ ~~,~i.U nu~tii~~ i ~~, i ~s ~~ ~
4. TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 - TRAFFIC SAFETY
COMMISSION: i cJ~~~I ~~-,~~ i~c<<,,~, ~-I i °; i ~,~r
5. TABLED JULY 15, 1997: FINAL PLAT FOR CROSSROADS SUBDIVISION
N0. 6, 37 LOTS BY RAMON & MARILYN YORGASON: ;~,_~,1;_,) ~_ ,.~;' <<<-.~>>
6. ORDINANCE #765 - SAUNDERS REZONE: ~~~~~ntiti~%`
7. ORDINANCE #766 - HANSEN ANNEXATION: : f ~~a1r~~~~o~
8. FINAL PLAT FOR GRANITE CREEK SUBDVISION, 23 LOTS AND A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY KEVIN HOWELL CONSTRUCTION: ,~'j;,.;.>~
9. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR DAKOTA RIDGE
SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGERyINC.: ~~'~~ ~~ ~L~~-~~cti~ t~~ r~~ ~~ ~~ ~~`~ -~~w<X'
10. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR BENITON
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY: C~.~'~ ~'4eti~u.~ ~k, r%h~~,,~, ::..,~.,..~, ,- ~>>~r
11. PUBLIC HEARING: ff EQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-O BY
MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD -1830 N CINDER ROAD /¢; ^,-~ f, -, .r,~.,, ~? ,
/,
-~?~'".,u^J<' l~i!s'_.'.; ~Cr~r'.. ~. ~~. i, ~F-a"-^^-~ lU 1'~l s~-4~Cl l_i _^.~',rt:r o !;-`LC ,~mLL-a,~v ~i
12. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
NEW CHURCH BUILDING BY MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N.
CINDER ROAD: ~" ~~„ .~
13. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 48.7
ACRES TO R-4 BY~WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD N. OF
VICTORY ROAD: .~~„s ~ , ~ ~, ,.,u~, ~~~=~~^ ~ ~ . ~_ ~ _vt ,~ '^
~~ ,(<
14. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF
LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF VICTORY ROAD: '~,t4,1„ ,~ r <-,-,J ,~ .*~+.-~ ~,*..;,'
15. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A
FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY LANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: r y+'~ -
~~:.L ~u~ltir -,,iv%~ ~~t'l
16. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-4 BY
MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO. ~h~y?t~ ~ -'~>>:~~~~,~~ ,~ ~-~-
17. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.: _,<_, I
18. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR HAVEN COVE
SUBDIVISION NO.7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT C4O.: (~, ,; ~ ~'~ ~ •~: ,
~lA ~\t ~~"~L)~ Yl"nC~l.c 7 ~-~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~~~1~ .~ ~ti'l`l'~ .._N.IJ hJ) ~. ,/.Ll: ~ ~ i
19. REQUEST FOR HOOK (7JP `TO CITY SEWER FOR 3195 N. CINDER BY GARY
& MARGARET PALMER: ~'a~~iA_i ~~~ -~11i-~~~..1 t ~ `~ ' ' ~ ~
20. PACKARD SUBDIVISION -LIFT STATION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT:.,'~~ .,, ,
21. LATE COMERS AGREEMENT WITH STOR-MOR SYSTEMS INC. AND
TREASURE VALLEY BAPTIST CHURCH: -~tl'1''~-~~'L4 ~
22. WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES: ,~~t; ~~~~
23. APPROVE BILLS: ")~~ c" l.~t
24. DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
25. EXECUTIVE SESSION:
MERIDIAN CITY COUNCIL AUGUST 5. 1997
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: Wayne Crookston, Gary Smith, Chief Bill Gordon, Anna Doty,
Dale Newbeny, B. Street and Janill Street, Richard Dees, Nancy Hanson, Marvin
Hanson, Susan Johnson, James McSpadden, Glenn Blaser, Todd Anderson, Thom and
Faye Jewell, Helen Sharp, Dale Sharp, Tammy deWeerd, Larry Woodard, John Shipley,
Judy Chavez, Doug Nichols, Matt Newton, Steve Moore, Rebecca Winston, Kevin
Winston, Jane Perez, Cheryl Wardle, Ben Jepson, Seth Myer, John Wardle, Dave
Fuller, Jennifer Campbell, Michael Campbell, Pat Tealey, Becky Bowcutt, Rich
Tomlinson, Patrick Drake, James Main, Dana Kaufman, Charles Eddy, Judith Larson:
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1997:
Corrie: Are there any corrections or alterations those minutes? I will entertain a motion
for their approval.
Morrow. So moved
Rountree: Second
Come: Motion made and seconded that we approve the minutes of the special meeting
held July 15, 1997, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING HELD JULY 15, 1997:
Corrie: Are there any corrections or alterations of those minutes? I will entertain a
motion that those be approved.
Tolsma: So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we approve the minutes of the meeting held
July 15, 1997, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Come: For the public, we have been asked to table item #5 this is the final plat for
Crossroads Subdivision No. 6 by Mr. & Mrs. Yorgason to the August 19 meeting. If
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 2
anyone is here waiting for that one only then I want to let you know about it. We will take
it as we come down the line and the Council can make the recommendation for table at
that point.
ITEM #1: CONDITIONS FOR PACKARD SUBDIVISION N0. 2 PRELIMINARY PLAT:
Cowie: Is there a representative from Packard Subdivision No. 2?
Tealey: My name is Pat Tealey I am here representing the developer's of Packard
Subdivision No. 2. We have read through the conditions that were supplied to us in a
letter dated July 24, 1997. And have responded back to staff to address their
comments and agree with all of the conditions placed on the plat. If there are any
questions based on our letter back to them I would be glad to answer them.
Cowie: Council, questions?
Rountree: I have none, other than maybe for Gary. The response to the conditions set
forth by Shari and Bruce for this subdivision have you reviewed those are they
satisfactory?
Smith: Yes they are.
Bentley: I have a question for Mr. Smith, on item 15 on the site specific, I wasn't here for
the discussion of that. Can you tell me we that refers about?
Smith: I believe that was a comment that Shari Stiles brought up concerning the existing
dwelling unit that was occupied by the owner of a portion of this property being platted
by the name of Brown, there is an existing house on Brown property and it is my
understanding from what Shari Stiles has said that there are two dwelling units on that
lot. She has raised the issue of the right for those two dwelling units to be existing on
that lot. That is all I know about it.
Tealey: If I can maybe I could shed a little bit of light on it. The original owners the
Brown's built the residence and then a shop. On the end of the shop they had living
quarters for their daughter. It is essentially a one bedroom built onto the end of a shop
out there. The shop is out there (inaudible). It was approved from what we have been
told it was approved through the County before the City of Meridian annexed it. I
believe Shari is just asking for some direction whether or not this is to make the Council
aware that this is anon-conforming use on this lot. The lot itself I believe is over '/
acre. It is this lot right here, you can see on your preliminary plat this is the residence
and this is shop and then the north end of the shop there is a, they originally built the
place for their daughter to live. It sits on an acre and a half and that is how big the lot
will be when it is platted.
Meridian City Council •
August 5, 1997
Page 3
Bentley: Do you have any plans to do anything with that at this time or is it going to
remain
Tealey: We don't own it. I think Shari was just bringing it up for your attention and
whether or not there was any action that the Council wanted to take on maybe
approving this non-conforming use or somehow enforcing the zoning code or City
ordinance.
Morrow. Follow up Mr. Mayor, did you ever own this particular lot? Was the action
taken prior to your ownership?
Tealey: Again I am just representing the owner and what I have been told by the owner
this action took place, the split was taking place at the real estate closing. In other
words we bought the remainder, the developer bought the remainder of the land and at
that same closing the people that own it now bought that other portion, the acre and a
half.
Morrow. So then the split was a one time split under the rules of Ada County because at
that juncture the ground was not within the city limits of the City of Meridian is that
correct?
Tealey: That is correct but I believe that even the zone for the county at the was for a
larger lot than an acre and a half. We are trying to legalize the lot now and making it a
part of the plat so that it would conform to the zone that (inaudible).
Bentley: So we have annexed that as part of this plat.
Tealey: There is a letter from the owners in the packet that went to the City Attorney
agreeing to the annexation and platting.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I have a question for Gary, yesterday or the day before I gave you a
copy of a letter that had been sent to you addressing some issues with respect to this
preliminary plat in terms of Bruce's and Shari's issues. Where those issues addressed
at that time or will they need to be addressed at the final plat stage?
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Morrow I think that the fencing issue is addressed
and perhaps the type of fencing has not been addressed. But the, let me back up, the
type of fencing had been addressed as a six foot high non-combustible fence perimeter
fence to be installed prior to applying for building permits. Except where the City has
expressly agreed in writing that such fencing is not required. It is my understanding from
the copy of the letters that I saw that the property owners in Carol Subdivision were
requesting a screening fence. The comment in our item 14 under site specific is it
referring to a 6 foot non-combustible fence. A development agreement is required on
this. I believe that the ditch along the East boundary of this subdivision is used by other
than Carol Subdivision lot owners, I can't say that for certain but the ditch would be
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 4
piped. Unless there are open ditches on Carol Subdivision that would need to be
burned the fence would not need to be non-combustible for that reason. Not having
been out to the site Councilman I can't tell you for sure what exists there.
Morrow. In any event I guess my point there is that if there is discrepancy between what
the plat says, between what the conditions of approval say by the time that we get to the
final plat approval those things will have been resolved. I understand that the plat does
call out for some cedar fencing. I want to make sure that the non-combustible areas and
the screen fencing are in fact compatible or at least v~ would make sure that we solve
that issue with some consistency based on (inaudible) at the final plat time.
Smith: If you are going to approve, I guess if the fence plan is approved as has been
presented tonight where they show chain link fence along part of it and cedar fence
along part of the perimeter is that what you want to hold the applicant to that
requirement?
Morrow. I guess my answer to that would be is I want to make sure it is doable I don't
want to see us approving cedar fence along a ditch that is on the western boundary of
Carol the Eastern boundary of Packard only to find out that it is a situation where the
ditch is maintained by burning it so that we burn up the fence. I understand, I am
sensitive to the fact that the homeowners of Carol Subdivision wish to have a fence that
is screenable. Meaning the cedar fencing but I want to make sure that we don't create
a conflict there that there is not a resolution to.
Smith: So it would be a, then the decision would be make at staff level whatever the
condition is in the field?
Morrow. I think, it has to be at least from my perspective. It seems to me like that ought
to be an issue that the staff can work out the developers and or their representative Mr.
Tealey can work out so that everybody clearly understands what it is vre are doing.
Thank you Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Council, you have your conditions on the preliminary plat, what is your pleasure?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the conditions for Packard
Subdivision No. 2 subject to staff and developer's representative resolving the fencing
issues and the location of the types of fencing that are to be put up.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the
conditions subject to staff and developer's representative resolving the fence issues,
any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 5
ITEM #2: TABLED JULY 1, 1997: FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF
LAW FOR VARIANCE REQUEST FOR ASHFORD GREENS SUBDIVISION BY
BRIGHTON CORPORATION:
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I might suggest that since we are now back working on those
ordinances then by virtue of our strategic planning meeting on the 22nd we are expecting
staff input from them concerning the new irrigation ordinance due at our meeting on the
26th and so it would appear appropriate that we table this to the first meeting in
September, September 2"d to allow us time to review at our strategic planning meeting
the proposals brought to us by staff for the irrigation ordinance. So moved
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to table item #2 until
September 2, 1997, any further discussion? Hearing none all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #3: TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #760 -COMMISSIONS, BOARDS,
COMMITTEES:
ITEM #4: TABLED JULY 1, 1997: ORDINANCE #761 -TRAFFIC SAFETY
COMMISSION:
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that although in our strategic planning we had
indicated that we wished to take care of these for the final time tonight as well as the P
& Z Building department enterprise fund ordinance, those are not completed in time to
have a fair chance for members of the Council and Mayor to review. It seems to me
appropriate that being the case that we table until the 19`h and prepare for adoption of
those ordinances assuming everything is agreeable to each Councilman and the Mayor
at that date. So I would move to table both items 3 and 4 to the 19th
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to table items 3 and 4 of the
two different ordinances, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #5: TABLED JULY 15, 1997: FINAL PLAT FOR CROSSROADS SUBDIVISION
N0.6, 37 LOTS BY RAMON & MARILYN YORGASON:
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 6
Currie: As I mentioned we received a letter from Mr. Yorgason's representative to table
item 5, I will entertain a motion to that effect.
Morrow: So moved
Bentley: Second
Currie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to table item #5 the final plat
for Crossroads Subdivision No. 6, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #6: ORDINANCE #765 - SAUNDERS REZONE:
Currie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING AND CHANGING
THE ZONING OF A CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF MERIDIAN WHICH
IS DESCRIBED AS A TRACK OF LAND LOCATED IN THE NE'/., SW'/, SECTION 12,
T.3N, R.iW B.M. AND THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ,ADA COUNTY, IDAHO AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. This is a rezone ordinance for the Saunders
property. Is there anybody from the audience that would like to have Ordinance #765
read in its entirety? Hearing none I will entertain a motion from the Council
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, I move that we approve ordinance #765 with suspension of rules.
Tolsma: Second
Currie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve Ordinance
#765 with suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Morrow Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #7: ORDINANCE #766 - HANSEN ANNEXATION:
Currie: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING
CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS THE SOUTH OF PINE
STREET AND WEST OF 8T" STREET, BM, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING
AN EFFECTIVE DATE. This is the ordinance for the Larry Hansen property, is there
anybody from the audience that would like to have this ordinance read in its entirety?
Seeing none, hearing none Council I will entertain a motion on Ordinance #766.
Rountree: Mr. Mayor I move that the Council approve Ordinance #766 with suspension
of rules.
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 7
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Rountree, second by Mr. Tolsma to accept Ordinance #766
with suspension of rules, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Morrow -Yea
MOTION CARRIED; All Yea
ITEM #8: FINAL PLAT FOR GRANITE CREEK SUBDIVISION, 23 LOTS AND A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY KEVIN HOWELL CONSTRUCTION:
Corrie: Is a representative of Kevin Howell or a representative here tonight.
Tomlinson: Good evening Mr. Mayor and Council members my name is Rich
Tomlinson, I work with Hubble Engineering. I don't know too much to talk about, it is the
same plat that you guys approved a couple of years ago. I believe you have a copy of a
letter from Tracy Persons addressing staff comments from last week. There was really
nothing that we didn't agree with or needed to change.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I have a question for Gary, have your site specific comments and all
of your questions been answered satisfactorily?
Smith: Yes they have.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I would move that we approve the final plat for Granite Creek
Subdivision subject to all compliance with all staff conditions.
Bentley: Second
Come: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to approve the final plat for
Granite Creek Subdivision with the approval of the staff, any further comments? All
those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Mr. Counselor, do we need that development agreement approved as well. is
that correct?
Crookston: That is correct.
Corrie: Okay
Morrow. I have a question for the counselor with respect to the development agreement,
you have reviewed the development agreement and found it to be satisfactory?
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 8
Crookston: I have
Morrow. And your recommendation is to approve it?
Crookston: That is correct.
Morrow. Okay, if there are no further questions Mr. Mayor I am prepared to move that
we approve and adopt the development agreement.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the development
agreement, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #9: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR DAKOTA RIDGE
SUBDIVISION BY MAX BOESIGER INC.:
Come: Is Mr. Boesiger or a representative here? At this time I will open the public
hearing.
Becky Bowcutt, 1111 S. Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bowcutt: This is a request for a variance on the Dakota Ridge Subdivision, it was
discussed and heard as a preliminary plat during the last City Council meeting. We are
requesting a variance of the 80 foot lot frontage on three lots. This lot 18 here, Lot 18
Block 3, Lot 4 and 5 of Block 6. For the members that were not present I think
Councilman Bentley was absent, we have this micropath coming in at an angle in order
to give this particular lot the adequate frontage requirement. Staff recommended that we
straighten this lot out, we have also got a sewer trunk line that is existing that runs down
through this property that goes into the Lake at Cherry Lane. Staffs comment was the
thought that it would be a good compromise in order to keep this pathway straight.
Secondly the fact that this lot is 16,271.8 square feet so it far exceeds the 8,000 square
feet. These two lots the sewer line comes through here, we have to keep a separate lot
for that trunk line. It is a 15 inch concrete sewer main. Therefore keeping that in a
separate lots prohibits us from trying to get any frontage out onto the public right of way.
Ada County Highway District did review this concept of a shared driveway, they
consented to it based on the fact that we would have this as a separate lot under the
ownership of the association and a perpetual ingress/egress easement to run with the
land would be forever granted to these two lots so they could never be denied access
tot their property. Our intent is to pave, it is 30 feet wide we would pave it and then we
would put curb and gutter to keep our drainage coming back into the street so it doesn't
sluff to the lots or to the south to the Lake at Cherry Lane. One of the questions from
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 9
one of the residents who lives in the Lake at Cherry Lane was they did not want to
promote vehicular access because they too have a similar lot right here. The solution
that we have for that is either one we gate it and put some type of city approved lock on
the gate or two we use like a Ballard system so people could go through there with a
bicyGe or walk through that area but no vehicular traffic would go down into the lake at
Cherry Lane. The other variance we are requesting is we have this one particular block
right here that staff basically counts all of this as the block length. Obviously it does
exceed 1,000 feet. In staffs reviewthey stated that a micro path was placed here for the
future elementary site that does break that block up. In your ordinance it talks about
long blocks and the utilization of micro paths to provide pedestrian access in a long
block. So we have done that here, but we do technically need a variance to the staff.
Those are the issues that we are asking you to act on this evening. Do you have any
questions?
Rountree: Just for the record Becky would you state that the frontage on those two lots
for the variance really meets the City requirements I terms of the lot sizes it is just a
matter of it is a private access as opposed to a public access.
Bowcutt: That is correct, lot 4 is 9,270.6 square feet, Lot 5 is 9,554.4 We have 80 feet of
frontage and 84 feet of frontage.
Corrie: Is there anyone from the public who would like to issue testimony on this item?
Hearing none I will Gose the public hearing, Council discussion?
Morrow. There being no discussion I would move that instruct the City Attomey to
prepare findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Rountree: Second
Come: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to have the Attorney
prepare findings of fact and contusions of law, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow. Mr. Morrow, on item #8 with respect to the development agreement my motion
erred in not incorporating into it language to authorize the Mayor to sign and the clerk to
attest that development agreement.
Corrie: I will entertain a motion, with the Council's permission we will go back to that
particular item and we will entertain a motion to that effect Mr. Morrow.
Morrow: With no objection I will withdraw the motion and Mr. Tolsma you with draw
your second?
Tolsma: I withdraw the second.
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 10
Morrow. I would like to restate the motion for item 8 to approve the development
agreement as reviewed by the City Attorney and authorize the Mayor to sign and the
Clerk to attest.
Tolsma: Second
Morrow. Motion made by Mr. Morrow second by Mr. Tolsma to approve the
development agreement with the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest, all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #10: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR BENITON
CONSTRUCTION CO.:
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the representative to speak
with the construction company first.
Doug Nichols, 594 Sturman Way, Eagle, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Nichols: I am sure you all have a copy of staffs report. Basically what we are looking
for is to temporarily occupy this building. Our lease agreement is a month to month
basis. We basically agree with everything on staffs recommendations. Idid have one
comment on the parking path and the asphalt drive into the building. I think you are all
aware that Ada County is planning a major intersection improvement this fall. They will
be taking most of the front yard and side yard out. We would just like to hold off and see
what Ada County does to that. Also it is probably going to be moved anyway. That was
the only question we had.
Corrie: Questions of the Council?
Rountree: Mr. Mayor, you indicated it was a temporary usage that you may be out by
fall or you may be in for 2 to 3 or 4 years?
Nichols: It is a month to month lease. The owner has not indicated any plans in the
future for that site but that could change on a month to month basis. We don't have any
objection to doing any of the site improvements. We would just basically like to wait until
Ada County is done. We will pave the driveway at that time and put in a parking lot.
Corrie: Thank you, is there anyone from the audience that would like to enter testimony
on this variance? Hearing none I will close the public hearing.
Morrow. I would like to ask Gary his comments with respect to this project, how the
rebuilt of Franklin and East. First affects this property and given the fact that it is owned
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 11
by First Security Bank which apparently currently has not plans for expansion to that
site.
Smith: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council I don't know exactly how the plans for
the extension of Corporate Drive affect this property but the plans are I believe pretty
much done. So it shouldn't be too difficult to determine the impact on this piece of
property from the design plans for the roadway. Adjustments could be made or
provisions could be made by the Beniton Construction Co. to make on site
improvements that would fit with the roadway as proposed by the Highway District. I
could be wrong but I know that they are supposed to be done with those plans by
September of this year so they can go to bid for this coming fiscal.
Nichols: I do have a copy of Ada County's plans. This is the existing house and existing
Meridian Road (inaudible) this shows their easement coming through here. First
Security owns also another parcel that wraps around this one in question here. Looks
like they have a driveway planned back here and they might have another back here on
this other little piece that comes down along side this. If we can get close enough to
this house this would look like an ideal place for a parking lot or a drive way back off of
this site with no access on Meridian Road. (Inaudible)
Crookston: Mr. Mayor, I believe it would be appropriate to at this time re-open the public
hearing and incorporate the testimony that Mr. Nichols just gave.
Corrie: Thank you counselor, you are very correct. We will re-open the public hearing
and accept the testimony of Mr. Nichols, I will keep it open in case we have another
idea come up here.
Crookston: You need a motion on that.
Morrow: So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we re-open the public hearing and accept the
testimony as given by Mr. Nichols, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED? All Yea
Tolsma: I have a question for Mr. Smith, Gary on one of Bruce Freckleton's comments
on comment number 1 it says the property is currently hooked up to City Sewer and the
second sentence says sewer is not yet available to this site. I was just wondering
Smith: It is not hooked to sewer.
Morrow. Mine says City water
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 12
(Inaudible)
Corrie: Any further questions or comments from Council? We will close the public
hearing at this time.
Morrow. If there are no further questions Mr. Mayor I would move that we instruct the
City Attorney to prepare findings of fact and contusions of law for the variance for
Beniton Construction company.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to instruct the City Attorney
to draw up findings of fact and conclusions of law for the request for a variance, any
further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #11: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A REZONE FROM R-4 TO L-O BY
MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD -1830 N. CINDER ROAD:
Come: I will now open the public hearing and invite a representative from the Meridian
Assembly of God Church.
Patrick Drake, 704 Spyglass Way, Eagle, was swam by the City Attorney.
Drake: Good evening ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your time tonight. As you can
see from the request we are looking to adhere to the curcent regulations in the zoning
for our church. The property was developed 13 years ago prior to the zoning being in
effect. So after discussing at length with Planning and Zoning it was determined that
Limited Office District would be a harmonious with the comprehensive plan. So we are
here this evening to follow that route to comply with the current zoning regulations.
Corrie: Any questions of Mr. Drake?
Drake: I do have one question, under findings of fact and conclusions of law I am
looking at page 11 gentlemen, under the topic of decision and recommendations the
Planning and Zoning Commission does recommend that this be approved. There is one
sentence that surprised us, it is in the middle it says and/or that the property only be
developed under a conditional use process. It seems as though it is kind of redundant
because at this time we are applying for the L-0 which does permit the church usage.
So as we continue to grow if we need facilities we would be able to come back to the
building department every member on that would get a chance to check off to make
sure that it currently meets all the city guidelines in the check and balance system. With
that sentence the way it is proposed it would sound as though every time we wanted to
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 13
pull a building permit we would have to go back through the conditional use process
versus through the building department. So we would like to have that verbiage clarified
if we could if any motions are made and passed this evening in place.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, possibly either Gary or Wayne could shed some light on the
reasoning behind the conditional use process for that. Us having been through the
process ourselves recently it is a valid issue with respect to expansion of existing uses
requiring new conditional uses for each expansion. So having said that Gary would you
explain what it is or Wayne or both a line of thinking there. I know that Shari is not here
this evening so you are kind of trying to substitute for her.
Smith: I am afraid I have no comment Mr. Councilman, I don't know. I am not familiar
with that part of the ordinance.
Crookston: I would just comment that the conditional use permit is a requirement of our
ordinance where it falls into place is if you decide to do some changes to the buildings
that you are going to have on the property you would have to come back for a
conditional use permit for those changes.
Drake: It would appear that particular part of this recommendation would be redundant
with the process of actually pulling a building permit sir. When you look at the agencies
that are involved in the check list we submit a set of plans to them, each agency has a
chance to review that process and then check off accordingly. We hire local engineers
and architects that carefully go through the City regulations which have been drafted
well. We want to adhere to them. With us being in the LO zoning we would meet the
requirement for church usage. But having to come back for conditional usage would be
a burden to the owner because then we have a situation where we are adding 60 to 90
days plus the cost of that conditional use process. So we feel that the City has done a
real good job with the regulations and there is a check and balance system and we
would like to adhere to it, but it seems redundant and kind of like double jeopardy for us
to have to go back through that process each time as we do want to modify because we
would meet the guidelines and requirements by the building permit process.
Crookston: I understand that it is just in our ordinance that whatever if you wanted to
place another building on that property then you have to get a conditional use permit for
the City to allow you to construct that building. Just as you are doing right now.
Drake: The LO would be in the comprehensive plan for the City (inaudible) for that
usage. What would be the purpose of having to come back to the conditional usage
since we meet the requirement of that zoning for that usage sir?
Crookston: Well the zoning is not under the comprehensive plan it is our zoning
ordinance under which the LO zone what requirements are set forth for that zone. But
the conditional use permit of that to have the additional property used in a different
fashion than how it is being used now. So if you came back and you wanted to put
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 14
another small building or a large building on it you would have to come back for a
conditional use permit on that.
Drake: My question for the panel right now this evening is an opportunity o circumvent
that. It is a situation where you come back to the Planning and Zoning Commission you
have that 60 to 90 day period plus the cost of the mailing involved. It is currently the
church campus has been there 13 years we are growing, we expect to be building
facilities for everybody that is needed as time goes by. Is there someway in the City
ordinances that this could be clarified so that we don't have that process sir?
Crookston: You could do it by means of a variance which means that the ordinance
then would not be applicable to that church property. But under our ordinance now you
would be required to come back for an additional conditional use permit if you put
another structure on the property.
Drake: Is that the route that the City wants to continue in that process (End of Tape)
Crookston: For exactly the reason that you are demonstrating to the City. If you don't
want to comply to the ordinances as they stand now then you have the right to come in
and request a variance.
Drake: Would that be on the property sir or on a case by case as we continue to build
building or modify existing structures?
Crookston: It could be for the land, you could apply for a variance so that the land does
not have to apply for an additional conditional use permit which is required under our
ordinance now. The variance would allow you not to comply with that.
Drake: Thank you
Corrie: Is there anyone else from the audience that would like to issue testimony at this
time? I will close the public hearing. Council what is your pleasure?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we approve the findings of fact and conclusions
as prepared for us by P & Z.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the Planning and Zoning Commission, any
further discussion? Roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Morrow -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 15
Cowie: Is there a motion on the decision?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that the property set forth in the application be
approved by the City Council for the zoning amendment requested under the conditions
set forth in these findings of fact and conclusions of law including that the .applicant or
its successors, assigns, heirs, executors or personal representatives enter into a
development agreement and or that the property only be developed under the
conditional use process. That if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings of fact
and contusions of law and is not agreeable with entering into a development
agreement and or that property only be developed under a conditional use process this
application for a zoning amendment should be denied.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded on the decision an recommendation as read, any
further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Come: I will entertain a motion for an ordinance.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare an
ordinance for the rezone of the property owned by the Meridian Assembly of God.
To-sma: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Tolsma to have the City Attorney
prepare an ordinance for the rezone from R-4 to L-O, any further discussion? All those
in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #12: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FORA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A NEW CHURCH BUILDING BY MERIDIAN ASSEMBLY OF GOD - 1830 N. CINDER
ROAD:
Cowie: At this time I will open the public hearing, Mr. Drake if you would like to come
forward again.
Patrick Drake, 704 Spyglass Way, Eagle, was swum by the City Attomey.
Drake: As per the City guidelines we are asking for a conditional use to build a new
sanctuary on the property. We are in three Sunday morning services and we are
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 16
looking forward to getting together as one congregation in one larger building. Thank
you.
Corrie: Any questions?
Rountree: Do you have a site plan concept plan anything you can show us what it is
you are proposing to do?
Drake: I believe we do, we have hired a local architect firm Design West and one of
their representatives is with us Jim Main. We can pefiaps see what he has. I believe in
the comments in the facts and conclusions in the packet a site plan was submitted back
in June as per Commissioner Smith's requests that I believe depicts and shows the site
plan as well as the potential elevation of the new structure.
James Main, 9 12"' Avenue South, Nampa, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Rountree: If you can just give us a two minute run down of your complex for the record.
It is not in the record for the P & Z hearing what it is you are proposing to do.
Main: Run down on the new building. What we are proposing to do is build a 21,000
square foot multi-purpose facility. It would be constructed of concrete masonry units, tilt
up concrete, and a standing seam metal roofing system. It would be located to the east
of the existing structure approximately 60 feet to the east with a courtyard in between.
We would add new paving with approximately 450 parking spaces and develop
approximately an additional 8 acres parking and landscaping. We have received the
findings of fact and conclusions of law from the Planning and Zoning Commission and
we have no problems with complying with any of their requests.
Bentley: The material that it is constructed, is it similar in design to what the current
existing building is?
Main: The existing building is a type 5 non-rated building which is a stick frame
construction with a brick veneer. It has a flat roof with a center area which has a steeple
and cross on it. This would be similar in construction type and appearance.
Bentley: You read the comments concerning the lighting an the neighbors concern to
make sure that we don't encroach upon their lighting?
Main: Right, we did read those comments and I may contact our neighbor and have him
review the lighting before we proceed with it. He seems to be very well read in lighting.
Bentley: I have another question, your sidewalk out front, the height of it. Is that ACHD's
requirement that be elevate that much?
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 17
Main: Right, we came before you for a conditional use earlier in the year and all the
developments along Linder Road were done under that conditional use. The sidewalk
was installed per ACHD guidelines.
Drake: And we took the minimum route, they were set between 1 foot and 3 feet off the
existing grade.
Bentley: I wonder what their plans are for the road, they are going to have to have
carriage steps to get up on the sidewalk. Thank you
Corrie: Any further comments or questions? Anyone else who would like to issue
testimony in this hearing? Hearing none I shall Gose the public hearing
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we adopt the findings of fact and conclusions of
law as prepared for us by P & Z.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law as prepared by the Planning and Zoning Commission, any
further discussion? Roll call vote
ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Morrow -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie; I will entertain a motion for the recommendation and decision.
Morrow: Mr. Mayor, the City Council of the City of Meridian approve the conditional use
permit requested by the applicant for the property described in the application with the
conditions set forth in the findings of fact and conclusions of law or similar conditions as
found justified and appropriate by the City Council. That the property be required to
meet the water and sewer requirements, the fire and life safety codes, uniform fire code,
parking, paving, and landscape requirements and all ordinances of the City of Meridian.
The conditional use should be subject to review annually or more often if conditions
warrant upon notice to the applicant by the City.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley for the decision and
recommendation as read, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 18
ITEM #13: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING OF 48.7
ACRES TO R-4 BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST GROVE ROAD, N. OF
VICTORY ROAD:
Corrie: I will open the public hearing and invite the representative from Westpark to
testify first.
Becky Bowcutt, 1111 S. Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bowcutt: This property probably looks familiar to you, it came before you I think about
two years as the western portion of Highlands Ranch Subdivision. At that time they
were asking for annexation and rezone of the western portion and the eastern portion.
They had a preliminary plat and I believe they were going for multiple different type
zones ranging from R-4 or R-8, R-15, I believe they even requested some commercial
and office and so forth. What is before you this evening is this westem portion. We are
requesting an R-4 zone of the entire property. We are contiguous with the City limits
right here is Salmon Rapids Subdivision, this is their phase four the final plat that came
before you about 2 to 3 months ago. So we are contiguous at this point. The property is
bounded here by the Eight Mile Lateral and to the east this is the Ridenbaugh Canal it
has frontage on Victory and Locust Grove. What we are requesting is annexation,
rezone to R-4 and then preliminary plat approval for 140 lots. The acreage on this
property is 48.7 acres we have 5.23 acres in common area. The number of buildable
lots is 140. These are all single family dwelling lots, all of them meet or exceed the
8,000 square foot requirement of the R-4 zone. They all meet the 80 foot of frontage.
The density that we are proposing is 2.87 dwelling units per acre so we have what we
consider a pretty low density compared to some of the other projects that jump up over
3 or 3.5. Do you have any questions that I can answer concerning the annexation, I
don't want to go into the plat since I will have to do it again. I don't believe that we are
hearing these concurrently are we?
Corrie: The plat will be next. Council questions of Ms. Bowcutt?
Rountree: Concerning the boundary on this particular one the rectangular block on the
southeast corner is not part of the description of•this property is that correct?
Bowcutt: This part right here, no sir, unplatted zoned RT. This is not a part RT, this is
not a part zone RT, R-4 across the street, it is R-4 right here Los Alamitos Subdivision
and this is the Stoppello property right here. Water is right here at the Eight Mile Lateral
it will be extended to this point into Salmon Rapids and sewer will come out of Los
Alamitos through Mr. Stoppello's property. We have been negotiating with him for quite
a few months now. We have done a lot layout for him. We have done a topographic
survey of his property as evidence that he could sewer into that Nine Mile Trunk line.
And verbally he has agreed and I think I put in my statement to the City Council that we
will provide a written easement for the City Attorney and the City Engineer for their
review.
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 19
Corrie: Any further questions? Thank you Becky, anyone from the audience that would
like to issue testimony at this time?
John Shipley, 2770 South Locust Grove, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Shipley: This came before Planning and Zoning a couple of months ago. 1 had stated
some concerns at that time. My south property line goes back I think there are going to
be 12 or 13 houses on that property line. There is currently a farmers drain ditch that
goes all down my property line on that property. Which is a buffer for inrigation water
that (inaudible) through the rocky terrain in that point in my (inaudible) I get a large
quantity of water subbing up into those lots that will be on that other side. I would like
some assurances from the City Council that there will be some kind of a drainage
system put in place there since that is an existing water track that goes into the Nine
Mile Drain there. So that somewhere in the future if I am flooding out one of the
neighbors and they decide to litigate against me that I don't have to hire a lawyer and
defend myself for something that I have always done. I can't condone this property until
I get those types of assurances. I think they have covered the fencing. I burn my ditch
and my fence on that side and there was something about anon-combustible fence. I
have heard that already but I haven't gotten anything in writing about the water. When
they brought it before Planning and Zoning they said that the water was a lot deeper
than it really is at that point. There is one of them plastic pert pipes in the side of my
back porch and I walked over there before I came to this meeting and lifted the cap off
and looked down and I can see the water that is up to about 15 to 18 inches from the
surtace at that point. So that denotes the cattails that grow there. I wouldn't want some
other young person to buy a lot there and build a house there and then decide that my
irrigation water was causing them trouble. If I can get something in writing or something
along that I would condone this project. That is all I have to say.
Corrie: Thank you, questions Council?
Morrow. No, I have none for Mr. Shipley I will ask that of Ms. Bowcutt.
Corrie: Anybody else from the public that would like to issue testimony at this time?
Nancy Hanson, 2460 East Victory Road, Meridian was sworn by the City Attorney.
Hanson: I will just read my concerns to you it is a little better than trying to adlib. This
voices some of our concerns regarding the above development. Although the developer
is now being more responsive to neighbors issues our main concerns remain as those
voiced in response to earlier applications by Westpark Company. First Meridian is
growing too quickly, dense development of this rural community wastes farmland and
puts too many demands on the small town's core resources. Although these new
properties and citizens in the community theoretically increase the tax base it cannot
keep pace with the increased demands of burgeoning schools, crime, fire and requests
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 20
for other city resources. Second, water even though from a city well is still a concern to
us because every time a well is drilled to take water from a new source the old source
loses some of its supply. Many of us have fairly shallow wells and do not want the
expense and hassle of wells drying up. We also do not want to hook onto City water.
Both re-drilling and hooking to City water are extremely expensive processes and we
have already invested heavily in our existing well. Third, we also worry about the
increased traffic volume generated by a 139 single family dwelling lots. If each of the
139 families makes the allotted norm of 10 vehiGe trips per day another 1390 cars
travel to and from the area each day. Fourth, inevitable growth and development does
not necessarily mean this farm land really needs annexation into the City and zoning of
an R-4. Luxurious houses on large lots increase the tax base without straining the core
services. Allowing this property to remain under Ada County jurisdiction would allow
development of 1 acre to 5 acre lots keeping the density down and more closely
following the comprehensive plan which states existing rural land uses and farm
ranches shall be buffered from urban development expanding into rural area by
innovative land use planning techniques. New urban density subdivisions which abut or
are approximal to existing rural residential land uses shall provide screening and
transitional densities with larger, more comparable lot sizes to buffer the interface
between urban level densities and rural residential densities. In summary we
recommend that you the City Council follow the comprehensive plan and say no to the
developers requesting annexation of farm land for dense subdivisions.
Cowie: Thank you, any questions or comments of Council? Anyone else from the public
that would like to issue testimony at this time? Seeing none I will Gose the public
hearing.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, before we close the public hearing I would like to hear Ms.
Bowcutt's response.
Cowie: Okay, I will re-0pen the public hearing.
Bowcutt: Mr. Mayor and Councilman Morrow, I have been in contact with Mr. Shipley,
we have talked in person, we have talked over the phone on at I think at least two
occasions. I have walked that property myself, I was out there again this morning
walking along the perimeter looking at the ditches and stuff because I hadn't been out
there for a couple of months. There is water out there, there are some of those
drainage ditches that are leaking. They are small ditches that pick up the drainage
water. Mr. Shipley's water comes off the Eight Mile lateral it runs across on our
northwest corner and then turns and goes east toward the Nine Mile Drain. There are
also a couple of small like drainage or waste ditches that look like they pick up the water
when they irrigate the alfalfa. Those ditches are terribly overgrown. One of them kind of
dissipates and the water just kind of goes all over the ground. It doesn't go anywhere it
just terminates. The other one continues on. I think we can coordinate with Mr. Shipley
and work something out. He and I talked about possibly doing some minor berming like
a couple or two foot berm or something. Because his number one concern was he didn't
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 21
want to damage anyone's property with his agricultural irrigation water. So I think we
can work something out. The other land owners that I have talked to in that vicinity we
have addressed it in this same fashion. That we work with them to make sure that their
drainage water their tail water continues on making sure if they are a little bit higher than
our property with a little bit of a berm and so forth. So I think that is something we can
work out to his satisfaction and the City Council's.
Morrow. And the issue with respect to the water table and the lots?
Bowcutt: We have five monitoring tubes out on the property, they have been there, they
were installed in January. That is the first thing that I recommended that my client do.
They have retained a licensed hydrologist and geologist who is monitoring those on a
monthly basis. The water table is deviating obviously with the seasons it is ranging from
some places it is 9 feet some places it is 6. Up by Mr. Shipley's property where that
water is running across the surface of the ground the pesometer readings are high. The
notation that he made in his last log report that he faxed to me was that he believe that
surface water was getting into the test hole that is where it was coming from. We also
have to kind of fill that area. It is kind of low right in there. If you have noticed Locust
Grove sits real high and then that property just drops off. I talked to Mr. Johnson about
probably going in and putting a little bit of fill in there to kind of bring that elevation up a
little bit. So it is more consistent with the rest of the property.
Cowie: Any further discussion Council, questions of staff?
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, are there any comments that you might have Gary?
Smith: No I don't.
Morrow. We do have provisions that should this get to the preliminary and final plat
stage we have provisions with respect to ground water and notifications and so on and
so forth. That can take care of that issue.
Smith: Yes
Morrow. We would also then review the solutions to the drainage problems that are
being discussed here by Mr. Shipley.
Smith: Yes
Bentley: I have a question for Gary, sewer capacity is adequate to handle this project?
Smith: I think with the increased capacity, treatment capacity that we are engaged in
right now at the waste water plant we don't have a problem with this.
Cowie: Any further questions? I will close the public hearing.
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 22
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would ask the City Attomey if there has been substantial enough
change in testimony or enough testimony that it would merit a change in the findings of
fact and conclusions?
Crookston: No there has not.
Morrow. That being the case I would move that vve adopt the findings of fact and
conclusions as prepared for us by P & Z.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the findings of
fact and conclusions of law prepared by Planning and Zoning, roll call vote.
ROLL CALL VOTE: Tolsma -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Morrow -Yea
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: Entertain a motion for the decision and recommendation.
Marrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that the City Council of the City of Meridian approve
for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth for these findings of fact and
conclusions of law. Including that the applicant or its successors and interests, assigns,
heirs, executors, or personal representatives enter into a development agreement. That
if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings of fact and conclusions of law and or
is not agreeable with entering with a development agreement the property should not be
annexed. The development agreement would also include a resolution to the draingage
issues with respect to the Shipley property.
Rountree: Second
Come: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree on the decision and
recommendation, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: We need a motion for an ordinance.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attomey to prepare an
annexation ordinance for the annexation and zoning of the 48.7 acres to R-4 by
Westpark Company.
Bentley: Second
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 23
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley to request the annexation
ordinance be drawn up, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #14: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR
SHERBROOKE HOLLOW SUBDIVISION BY WESTPARK CO. - E. OF LOCUST
GROVE ROAD, N. OF VICTORY ROAD:
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing and invite the representative Becky to
come forward again.
Becky Bowcutt, 1111 S. Orchard, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Bowcutt: The previous application that came before you a couple of years ago on this
western side had approximately 171 lots, depending on which version you looked at
anywhere to between 160 to 171 it may have varied from time to time. We have 140 so
the number of lots has been substantially reduced and that was due to bringing into
compliance with the R-4 standards, the 8,000 square feet and the SO foot of frontage.
The property is extremely peculiar in shape and was one of the more difficult ones that I
worked with to lay it out. The standards of the 80 foot frontage, maximum culdesac
length of 450, trying to keep our block lengths reasonable was difficult. We met all of
the criteria with the exception of the block length and we tried some varying ideas and
to no avail and this was basically the best that we could do with the property. We have
provided some intermittent lots these would be landscaped they would be common lots
owned by the association. They are basically situated in areas where they could be
utilized for storm drainage. Out in this vicinity we know that we have got to have some
common areas in order to store some of that storm drainage. We have got one, this
drainage lot here, the Nine Mile Drain is right here so that would give us an opportunity
to have some type of an overflow for the pre-development drainage. When we drafted
this particular layout, one of the things I did was I went through and read the history of
the prior applications. The minutes, testimonies that were given at the public hearings,
the comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission members and the City
Council. One of the main things that stuck in my mind was the lack of communication
with the adjoining neighbors. They seem to be quite offended that no one had ever
taken the time to meet with them, discuss the application, take their comments and then
respond to them in some type of a written form. I did notify all property owners within
300 feet. We held a neighborhood meeting here in Meridian at Westpark Company's
office so it would be more convenient than my office for them to attend. I think we had
about 6, 7 or 8 people that attended. We talked about various items such as traffic,
densities, lot sizes, drainage, irrigation, fencing and so forth. They asked for certain
things like copies of the traffic study, copies of the initial ground water analysis. Copies
that they could have at their home to look at and get a good idea of what we are
proposing. All of that information was sent out to these people and I did respond to them
in writing and I think at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting that letter was
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 24
submitted as part of the public record. So I would like to make sure that it continues
forth in the public record of what we told these people. The issues here, the residents
that attended live I think here, an individual bought a home here, another individual
owned a home here and then the Coons I believe live on the south side or they have a
trust on this property on the south side. We indicated to them that we would have non-
combustible fencing along this perimeter here. When I spoke with Mr. Shipley I
indicated to him that it is in the City requires along our perimeters when we adjoin
agricultural land that has potential for burning their ditches or burning their fields that we
have non-combustible fencing. So that would be chain link around that area. One of the
questions that we asked what are the future road improvements on Locust Grove. It is
indicated that Locust Grove from Overland to Victory is going to be improved in 1999. It
is I the plan but I don't believe they have any funding for this project at this time. At that
time then they will rebuild that bridge, we have that kind of outdated bridge that is
located right here. Secondly, they asked questions like what is the future build out of
these streets. Both of these are going to be 90 foot right of ways, they will have a 50
foot road section with four lanes. We also stated that we would provide some drainage
berming along this southeast area to protect these lots. The other issue that was
brought up is (inaudible) irrigation water comes across here and then it exits through us
and goes over to the Nine Mile Drain. We will have to pipe it, it is a small ditch but we
will have to continue that on. The other issue that I want in the record is they said we
don't want people coming out complaining that we are bailing or that we are wind
rowing. How will you protect our agricultural pursuits. My recommendation to them and I
did provide this in writing is that on the plat we would put the right to farm statement out
of the Idaho Code and explain to them how that worked and so forth. The other issue
that they asked for which we did agree to was the restriction of some one story homes.
We have two lots here that adjoin, two lots here that adjoin Victory Road that we would
limit to one story homes. Then we had six lots here that we would limit to one story
homes. That is just to project their view corridor of that Boise front. The original
application that you looked at also had the access right here, I think that was one of the
main problems that the highway district and the City had and that was obviously one of
the hot points for Mr. Shipley. We are aligning this approach with Salmon Rapids. What
we intend to do is the first phase would be built off of Victory Road so we could have an
opportunity for ACHD to catch up with us and coordinate the connection here when they
do the rebuild of Locust Grove. Mr. Shipley's home sits right in this vicinity, by moving
that street down then that allowed us to have some nice deep lots, these are 170 feet
deep, they are ranging from 14,400 and some odd square feet to 13,300 and then this
one is 10,000. So next to his home we have some deeper, larger lots to give us a little
bit of a transition. We are making this stub street connection at this point here and then
there is a stub street in Los Alamitos here and here so that eventually we would have a
connection through Mr. Stoppello's property. At this time he doesn't have any intentions
of developing however in the future the property will most likely be developed since it
will have a sewer main line going through it. So we are making sure that it is being
placed in a position where the property could be developed around it without any
hindrance to him. As I mentioned earlier we have had meetings with him, he has
verbally agreed under certain conditions that he will grant the Ciry of Meridian a sewer
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 25
easement so that we may construct that sewer trunk line and extend it southward. I will
be writing up that easement and that documentation. We are also providing another
stub street to this property here that was dictated by Ada County Highway District. We
will have a temporary tum around right here until such time as it is extended to the
south. This area we have the Nine Mile Drain but it is real small as it runs through here
and it kind of comes in and then diagonals over here, runs onto Mr. Stoppello's property
and comes across and then it dumps here and the drains start to merge and then it gets
large and it gets deep. What we are proposing here is this area was left undeveloped
intentionally it is kind of a little wet area when you walk out there is water, there are
some cattails. It is a nice riparian area that I thought should be left and preserved. That
drain I think what you are seeing is a little bit of sluff right in this corner coming off from
the Ridenbaugh Canal. Over here is just dry as a bone all through here but just this
corner here. We will take that drain, we will move over to this location here and run it
parallel. We are going to have to go through the variance process for our ditches, we
have the Ridenbaugh which obviously exceeds the 48 inch, we have the Eight Mile
Lateral which this is all concrete ditch but it far exceeds the 48 inch. And then we have
this natural Nine Mile Drain so we will have to under the ordinance submit a variance for
that. I have made these micro connections here for a pedestrian bridge to the other
side. Shari and I talked about I know there had been discussions about a vehicular
connection. In my discussions with the Highway District they said no that is not the
place they want the crossing to go over the Ridenbaugh. Secondly the elevation
difference between the two properties they don't think it is appropriate. What they did
want was a pedestrian bridge. So the Highway District one of their requirements was
that we put into a trust fund I believe $15,000 and that would be 50°k of a pedestrian
bridge over the Ridenbaugh Canal. Then when the property to the east develops then
obviously they would contribute and that would be built. It would have to built to meet
Nampa Meridian Irrigation District standards. Their big contention obviously as you have
experience in the past is liability. So one of the things we talked about is could you have
a fully caged pedestrian bridge over it so kids couldn't jump off of it or tie ropes to it and
swing off of it and so forth. I think that is probably what they would have to end up doing
in order to satisfy Nampa Meridian. I probably ought to address staffs comments, I kind
of have a lift that is gone through here. In order to alter that Nine Mile Drain I will have to
go through Nampa Meridian Irrigation District and the Bureau of Reclamation. It is under
Bureau of Reclamation jurisdiction but Nampa Meridian maintains it and so we will be
able to work with both of those agencies. In Los Alamitos Bureau of Reclamation
insisted that it remain open. I assume that they will probably say the same for this drain
so that it picks up the drainage water. We will be providing a detailed landscape plan
on our common areas that will be submitted with our final plat. I have stated that, we
will have non-combustible fencing along our perimeter. At our entrance here where we
have landscaping we would like to go with vinyl fencing, I don't think it has to be non-
combustible because it doesn't adjoin any agricultural land. Mr. Johnson intends on
using some of that new vinyl type fencing it is kind of like across-hatched pattern. It is
not like a rail vinyl, it is very decorative. That is what he proposes to use at this entrance
here. As a part of our variance application we will have to also request a variance on
our block length. I have this block backing up to that Eight Mile Lateral. Obviously there
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 26
was no way for us to break the block. You could break the block with a micro path but it
doesn't go anywhere or stub street but it doesn't make any sense. We have block one,
two, three and seven that exceed 1000 feet. This particular block here, this is block 3
here, this is block 2, and then I think it is this block here. They are counting as they go
around even though 1 do have the micro-path connections. So that technically you could
walk, come through and go from one to the other. I did meet with Kenny Bowers on this
project, Kenny and I talked about the stub streets, the two access points, the
configuration. He indicated that he felt that adequate access has been provided for the
project and he did not have any other requests such as a Ridenbaugh crossing or any
additional connections internally (End of Tape) dealt with was the L intersection issues,
we have had that on a couple of our plats now. In my statement I indicated that it does
meet ACRD standards it does not have to meet the 100 foot centerline radius because
they are L intersections. Any of them that did not qualify Mr. Sale reviewed each
intersection and any that did not qualify then we went ahead and revised them to meet
the 100 foot radius. Do you have any questions that I can answer?
Bentley: Becky, on your plat map there over where you have the cattails, is there a
chance of flooding into those lots that are over there?
Bowcutt: No, because the drain is going to catch it, the drain comes through this like
and comes through like this and meanders over this way. Then that run off comes if
you look when you walk, I walked this whole length today, it is isolated right here in this
area and it doesn't go west of the little drain. Kind of like it is all kind of down hill in the
water, I think kind of sloughs downhill and then goes into that drain and then it is dry on
the other side. So no 1 don't believe we have any problems.
Morrow. Becky, with regard to the sewer easement that crosses the Stoppello land, to
play deviPs advocate if that fell through how would you sewer this property?
Bowcutt: If Mr. Stoppello came up with another condition that we couldn't meet, the only
other way to sewer the property then would be to come down Locust Grove. That would
be the only other alternative.
Morrow. Would that in fact be a gravity system?
Bowcutt: Yes, but it would not be in the alignment as stipulated on your master plan. It is
supposed to follow the Nine Mile Drain. What elevation difference would there be we
would have to calculate it to see if the sewer would come up a foot, would it create a
situation that a lift station would have to be placed as it went south. With this particular
plan (inaudible) it comes down right through here (inaudible) for future extension to the
south.
Morrow. At this juncture you have not done a cross comparison to see if that is a doable
scenario and to how it impacts the long term sewer trunk line layout?
Meridian City Council •
August 5, 9997
Page 27
Bowcutt: No sir we have not done that. I think we had faith in Mr. Stoppello that if we
meet his conditions that he will go along with this. That does include monetary
compensation is one of his conditions, substantial monetary compensation.
Corrie: Any further questions of Ms. Bowcutt? Thank you, anyone else from the
audience that would like to enter testimony on this preliminary plat? Council any further
questions of staff?
Morrow: Comment Mr. Mayor, I guess for point of discussion with the Council is I don't
have a particular problem with the preliminary plat but it does seem to me like a
condition of approval of the preliminary plat ought in fact to be a resolution in writing of
the easement access issue through the Stoppello property. If in fact that doesn't occur
then 1 would like to see the preliminary plat revisited in the public forum to discuss the
issues of sewer alignment. I think that changes the game a little bit.
Rountree: We would be premature considering any action on this until we get an
annexation ordinance approved.
Morrow. That would be correct, we can't approve the preliminary plat until in fact we
have adopted the annexation ordinance.
Crookston: That is correct.
Morrow. The motion now at the end of the public hearing would be to table it.
Corrie: 1 will Gose the public hearing and entertain that motion.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor I would move that we table the request for a preliminary plat for
Sherbrooke Hollow Subdivision by Westpark Company until the annexation ordinance
has been adopted.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion is made and seconded that we table the preliminary plat until the
annexation and coning ordinance has been approved, any further discussion? Hearing
none, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
FIVE MINUTE BREAK
ITEM #15: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A FAMILY LIFE CENTER BY CHERRY IANE CHRISTIAN CHURCH:
Come: Is there a representative from the Church first.
Meridian City Council •
August 5, 1997
Page 28
Larry Woodard, 1701 Almond, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Woodard: My name is Larry Woodard I am an elder at Cherry Lane Christian Church
and I am here tonight to just briefly give you some acquaintance with our congregation
and our plans for our final development of our campus. In 1980 we purchased these
four acres after we had been advised by the then City Council that the property that we
had earlier acquired at the NE corner of Locust Grove and Pine was in fact going to be
an industrial park. We were told to go over and locate out on Cherry Lane because that
would be where the residential growth of the City would be headed. We followed that
advice and acquired the property that we now own at 2511 W. Cherry Lane. In 1983 we
constructed our sanctuary and a small educational wing and just as the Council
predicted within five years the subdivisions begin to come in around the church. As a
result we have had substantial growth. We have added to that original facility until we
now have 22,000 square feet of educational worship space. From our initial meetings
with the Council all parties were aware that we would expand as a congregation group
very similar to the discussion you had similar with the Assembly church and their plans.
Our request before you tonight happens to be the final building that we have for our
campus. Because of the growing evidence that the family structure in this nation is
under attack and yes even here in Meridian we have opted to make the last phase of
our building a family life center where we can better address the needs of the families of
this community and our church. It will contain a gym for youth, classrooms for instruction
to our many young married couples, Gassrooms for religious instruction and places
where those having addiction problems can meet. We fully expect that our facility will
be used by various community groups from time to time like AA the election board and
others. But it would be safe to say that the youth of our community will be the primary
focus of this new facility. Because any major modifications to our facility require
Planning and Zoning approval we submitted our request for a conditional use permit in
June anticipating construction this fall. But considering the time that is still required to
get a building permit and the approaching winter we now are looking at starting
construction next March. At the Planning and Zoning hearing several neighbors
expressed opposition to this new facility. One neighbor had taken it upon herself to
secure a petition of 100 reported homes in our area that were opposed to it. Concerns
range from the size of the building, the proximity to neighbors, the security lighting, the
lack of landscaping, general upkeep of our property and the loss of view by the
neighbors to the west. Since then we have met with many of the neighbors who directly
abut our property and found that most have no objections to this proposal. One man in
fact indicated his son is anxious to join our youth program as soon as the facility is
finished. We have heard their concerns and have agreed to revise our outdoor lighting
scheme, agreed to place two gates to keep people from parking behind the building
except when capacity crowds are expected. We learned during the Planning and Zoning
that some teenagers are parking out there at night that we weren't aware of. We have
lowered the height of the facility to minimize the impact on view. We agreed to obtain a
better idea of the effect of the building on the sunlight in the yards of two neighbors and
we have reduced our parking to the barest minimum possible to accommodate the
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 29
landscaping requirements. In fact the landscaping requirements represent one of the
more difficult aspects of this of meeting City requirements but we are committed to
providing extensive planting, although the 3 inch tree size is of particular concern. We
have expanded a tree area on the southeast corner of our property at the request of the
neighbors to the south and we will make this into a prayer garden. In addition to our
personal visits we notified the 100 families who had signed the petition and invited them
to an open use on July 28h and we had three couples which directly abut us on the
south and vest of 10. It is safe to say we were unable accommodate particularly the
suggestion by one neighbor that we move somewhere else. Because our congregation
has doubled in ten years to its present membership of 500 we are encouraged by what
the future holds for Meridian as a City and specifically our congregation as a Church to
minister to the spiritual and social needs of those of our community who will benefit from
this new building. I want to turn the podium over now to one of our architects who will
address some of the staff comments relating to the final plans for the building, its tenant
facilities such as lighting, building height, parking, gating access and landscaping. We
thank you for your consideration.
Dana Kaufmann: 14 12~' Avenue South, Nampa, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Kaufmann: As you just heard I am Dana with Olson and Associates we are the
architects for the proposed addition of Cheny Lane Christian Church. With regard to I
will just run down the list. With regard to the lighting some concern through the
neighbors has been expressed that we do not light their backyards we light the parking
lot. With that in mind we will not put any lights on the building itself. They will be either a
20 foot to a 25 foot high parking lot light directed away from the property owners back
towards the building and in some cases we will provide Ballard lighting to landscape
below the light line below the six foot fencing line. The building height at the ridge is
approximately 29 feet 8 inches, the eve heights will be 21 feet. This falls in line with
many two story homes. The parking, we have on site provided 139 parking spaces, it
exceeds the minimum required by the City statutes. One response to the problem with
parking behind the building at night we are going to provide gates with (inaudible) locks
for the fire department so they will have access behind. When we do have the gates
closed. The access around the building is provided with two existing curb cuts, we will
not be adding any more curb cuts to the facility. The stickler is the landscaping, our
parking lot as stands right now is short of the parking lot requirements for landscaping.
We propose to meet those requirements by the addition of approximately 57 trees to the
site. We would have one request would be to, if we were to add landscaping to
adjoining properties to help appease that requirement we would like to add those, have
those trees counted in our allotment. Some concerns the neighbors had was well I will
see the building from my backyard, yes this is true. We will, we have talked to several of
the neighbors about landscaping along their fence line. It is unfortunate that the one
side of the property the west side of the property abuts the Rutledge lateral and it has
been tiled. Nampa Meridian irrigation district will not allow any landscaping other than
grass over the top of this lateral. So to the adjoining property owners that are on the
west side we have offered to landscape on their side of the fence to help alleviate some
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 30
of their concerns with the building. We would ask that those landscape requirements be
counted toward the number that the City would require. Also along the south side of the
property one of the property owners has a sewer easement running on their back yard
and their back fence. It does not allow them to plant any trees on their side of the
property. The church as agreed to eliminate some of their parking spaces and provide
trees on our side to help screen the building. That is the prayer garden that was
mentioned before. That is all I have to say right now, any questions?
Bentley: I wanted to ask you, you say you have outgrown, your current membership
has outgrown your current facility capacity. What is your projection with the addition on
growth? How long before you outgrow that one?
Kaufmann: I vrould have to defer to Mr. Woodward on that.
Woodward: I think it is reasonable to assume with this facility completed based on
information we heard from a similar building built by the Nazarene's in Nampa that we
could experience 100 addition per year for several years. So we will experience some
substantial growth with this new facility.
Bentley: Do you have a time frame with your prediction of 100 people year of when you
would outgrow the current facility with the newest expansion.
Woodward: We already have three services each Sunday, our alternatives part of our
request will involve remodeling our present sanctuary so we can expand the size of our
worship facility. I would expect that within three to five years we will start topping out
again. At that point we will look at other church plans in the facility.
Bentley On this new addition is it going to be compatible in construction materials, the
original building?
Kaufmann: It will be compatible in the sense of the color. The materials will not be the
same, we will not have the brick we will have a synthetic stucco and a stucco panel,
metal panel that will be used for the construction. The metal panel takes the
appearance of a stucco look.
Bentley: And your first addition what is it made out of?
Kaufmann: The original structure is brick.
Bentley: Okay, but the first addition you put on?
Kaufmann: Is brick also, there is one more addition after that, that is siding residential
type siding.
Bentley: So we are going to have three different materials then?
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 31
Kaufmann: Yes
Rountree: I had a question if you would point out on the site plan the prayer garden
location.
Tolsma: Now, the gates that you were proposing they would go probably from here?
Kaufmann: (Inaudible)
Rountree: I guess I will state for the record that you have pointed to the southeast
corner of the lot south of the proposed addition encompassing about 5 parking places.
That is all I had Mr. Mayor.
Corrie: Okay, are there any others from the public that would like to enter testimony at
this time?
Thomas Jewell, 1438 N. Tina Marie, Meridian, was swum by the City Attorney.
Jewell: Mr. mayor and City Council, thank you for hearing my comments. When we
purchased our house approximately 3 '/ years ago we bought it as an unobstructed
view of the mountains. We believe that we paid extra for that view. When this building
goes in we will lose entirely our view to the east, we will no longer be able to see Bogus
Basin, we will no longer be able to see the sunrise. We feel that because of the
obstruction to that view and the proximity of the building to our fence that we will see a
substantial in property value. Part of why we bought this home was as an investment
towards our retirement to lose property value will impact us significantly in that area. I
requested a survey be done to see how much shadow from that building would be cast
on our home and into our yard. I received back from the architect a draft in which it
shows in the morning when the sun would be the, the shadow would be the longest that
the shadow line from the building would equal the shadow line and be right along the
same shadow line as our six foot fence which would be approximately 7 feet onto our
property. So two days after I got the survey I went out and I measured the shadow. My
house is 43 feet from my property line and the shadow from my six foot fence was four
feet up the side of my house. Given that the building is going to be 30 feet tall, 29 feet 9
inches, and is 25 feet from my fence that would cast a shadow clear across the street
on the opposite side of my home. I believe that would cut my sunlight down,
unobstructed sun light down in my backyard to probably about 3 hours a day. Here
again too it is a significant impact on my property. The landscaping was mentioned
during our meeting however I did not agree to it. They talked about putting 8 foot
arborvitaes on my side of the fence which is all find and good except that it would
decrease the usable square footage of my backyard substantially. It would require even
though they would pay for k and install it, it would require me to maintain it. Also I would
have to relocate my sprinkler system, pull out the existing landscaping which was just
put in. This would all have to be done at my expense, I think it is rather unfair to ask me
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 32
to do that. I do have some considerable concerns about the parking. With their growth
over there they are currently running three services, their parking right now is just about
to maximum. Their services overlap in that they have 15 minutes between their worship
services so you have people coming in and people going out at the same time. They
are also running Sunday school services at the same time as their worship service and
with the expansion 1 do not believe that the parking would meet code. So I really feel
that this needs to be looked at again. I believe that is all that I have, thank you very
much.
Judy Chavez, 2621 West Santa Clara Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Chavez: Thank you, I am here in support of Renee and Ford Grigg who will probably be
most affected by this new structure. I am here with many others in support like I said of
Ford and Renee. They weren't able to make it tonight and they composed a letter that
they asked that I read. And it goes, "Dear Mayor, City Council members and
representatives of the Cherry Lane Christian Church, Unfortunately my wife and I aren't
able to attend the hearing tonight. We however had this notarized letter on record. We
oppose the construction of the family life center. As residents of meridian we are aware
of the vast growth. We recognize the impact of the growth on the churches and the
community. We are sensitive to the desire of the Cherry Lane Christian church to have
a recreation center. But feel that the particular plan as proposed is unacceptable for an
established neighborhood. We have worked hard to make our home and back yard a
pleasant place for our family and guests. At present when we walk into our backyard we
have a panoramic view of the mountains. This adds charm and desirability to our
home." Renee put together some pictures of her house as it is without the structure.
She, there is a little explanation here of what she did, let me just read that to you.
"According to the architects of the proposed Cherry Lane Christian Church this
structure, though not exact is very similar to the one to be built. The picture of our
backyard was taken from our deck. I then paced the distance between the deck and the
back corner of the proposed building. The picture of the gym was by pacing the same
distances from the back corner of the Nazarene gym. I also use the same angle of my
lens so that everything would be the same scale. Although placement could potentially
be off by a few feet one way or another this should be a fair of what we will be looking at
if this building goes in. If you would like (inaudible) If a home were to go up on the
proposed site we would be sad to lose our view but we would accept this. If this building
is built our mountain view will be replaced not simply by another home but by a
gymnasium with a large plain stucco wall and aluminum roofing. The architects have
presented a very nicely drawn and color plan of the proposed front of this building.
Unfortunately we live behind the proposed structure and the back side is a very large,
unappealing warehouse type building. To make matters worse we are informed that
there will be no landscaping between our property and the proposed structure to help
camouFlage the warehouse image of this building because of an existing easement
which the church is building right up to. When we have tried to express our concern
about this to the church we were informed that `change is hard'. They are totally
insensitive to the impact that they have on us. We feel that this building will interfere
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 33
with our basic enjoyment of property, lessen our current property value and severely
limit future opportunity to sell our property. Before the planning and Zoning meeting we
collected signatures representing 100 households in the affected subdivision. These
people feel that the proposed structure is not appropriate as submitted for an already
established neighborhood. We have made suggestions to the church about alternatives.
One we have suggested that they remodel the original building and place the
gymnasium where the foyer is currently located. This would place the structure more
central to the lot, create more parking and insulate the neighborhood from noise and
lighting. This idea has been rejected because according to the church it would be
inconvenient. Two, we have suggested that they redesign the family life center to be
more aesthetically pleasing, using the same brick as in the original structure and
perhaps adding some windows in the rear to break up the monotony of the building.
This has been rejected because they say the cost is too prohibitive. Three, we have
suggested that they build it on a different location on the lot, they have rejected this
stating that it would be inconvenient because of the drainage and the work that would
have to be done to make it adhere to regulations. Four, we have suggested that they
search for a new piece of land that would meet the needs of their expanding
congregation and all of the foreseeable future needs without disrupting an already
existing neighborhood. This was out right dismissed even though the pastor admits that
although the proposed changes will meet all of their needs now member growth is so
large that beyond a few years they may have to go look for additional land anyway. We
have been informed by the church that given the location of our lot in respect to the
proposed building we "will not really be affected". If one vrere only to look at the plat
that would be an easy assumption to make. Apiece of paper cannot fully convey the
reality of the impact this building will have on our home. Because of the angle of our
property, positioning of our home, size of the building and lack of landscaping it will
literally tie like living behind a warehouse in a commercial area instead of the wonderful
neighborhood atmosphere that we now enjoy. We are not opposed to progress and
change, but owning and maintaining a home is the American dream and maintaining the
standards to afford us to enjoy our home is one of the reasons there are zoning laws.
We are asking the City Council to postpone this project until mediation can occur to
lessen the impact on and devaluation of our homes involved." She has just a few more
pictures that she would like to submit of the property directly behind her home, right
behind the fences and of the church building presently. Thank you
Bentley: I have one question, those pictures, is that area that they show, I saw the one
you were showing there along the fence. Is that part of the easement for the irrigation.
Chavez: I understand that is what those are.
Crookston: I have a question, you said that if they move the building and put it in a
different location or angled it in a different fashion that would be better for those people
whose letter you read?
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 34
Chavez; Just the angle you are asking me? I am not sure that is exactly what they
meant as far as angle. I know that Renee and For have expressed that they would,
they don't see say the structure itself cannot be added to the existing structure
altogether. It is my understanding of how the want the structure.
Crookston: I certainly may have misunderstood what you said, but if the church the new
portion of the church that is to be constructed is moved and therefore it will not interfere
with the Griggs property, their home but if it is moved wouldn't it interfere with another
property owners view/?
Chavez: I assume that it would.
James McSpadden, 1369 N. Rutledge Avenue, Meridian, was swum by the City
Attorney.
McSpadden: I live across the street and behind the current location of the church. that
they are proposing to add onto or the new facility they are planning to add behind the
church. I just wanted to voice my opinion, I agree with the Griggs in the aspect that the
construction materials that are being chosen here would not go along with the current
buildings that are surrounding this facility and would not upgrade the existing
community, the homes that are in the existing community. I just wanted to voice my
opinion of that. I think the construction materials, if it is going to be built, should be built
in accordance with the existing facility that is there.
Corrie: Any questions? Anyone else that would like to issue testimony at this time?
Todd Anderson, 2492 W. Willard Street, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attomey.
Anderson: I am a Haven Cove resident who was not listed among the 100 homes that
signed the petition against the proposed building. I give my support of that petition at
this time for the following reasons. The structure is large and it does not blend or follow
the current structures in the neighborhood. It would be an eyesore not only to the close
residents whose property value would be decreased by thousands but the architectural
design does not blend in with any of the current structures. I do not wish to hinder the
development but I would ask that a more moderate solution be evaluated and adopted.
The design as it is now is not acceptable for development in our community. Griggs
have mentioned some other options one is to move the structure closer to the center of
the lot. They say they might have problems engineering wise to do that but that would
move it away from residential properties and make it more, they could use parking in the
back lots than put in a structure so close to residential. Another opportunity was to make
the gym fit in where the foyer area is which would blend in with the current design of the
building. I think that both of these may be valid paths to choose but I think we need to
get together and have some concessions done on both sides because I don't think that
as a community it would be an opening for bringing bad architectural design to the
community. I don't want a warehouse in every comer of every subdivision that I go
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 35
around. I think that they should keep the design fairly close to the current design that is
already there. These are my thoughts and that is what I would propose.
Corrie: Thank you Todd, any questions? Anyone else that would like to issue testimony
at this time?
Seth Myer, 2895 West Cheryl, Meridian, was svuorn by the City Attorney.
Myer: I live I the Haven Cove Subdivision also. I just want to say that I agree with what
Todd just said and what Jim McSpadden just said. I don't need to elaborate they did a
good job.
Corrie: Anyone else?
Jewell: In regards to the landscaping going up on my property, in effect what we would
have is them moving their property into my back yard with no compensation to me.
They would then be past the easement as it stands. Also, one thing that I would really
like the City Council to consider is that as this church grows which it is going to do and I
am very happy that it is growing, I do support that. But in 3 to 5 years they are going to
be maxed out they will leave and then they will leave that building behind. It is not going
to go away so we really need to consider. Also, I asked Planning and Zoning a question
1 also asked all of the members of the congregation of Chen Lane Christian Church the
same question. Would they like this building in their backyard. Not once did I get a yes
answer, not once did I get an answer that says I really wouldn't' want it there but I
wouldn't mind. So the very people that are building this particular building don't want it
in their backyard either. So I ask that you consider that as well.
Corrie: Anyone else at this time?
Richard Dees, 2265 W. Sandalwood Drive, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Dees: Mayor Corrie and Members of the council thank you very much for hearing me
this evening. It is called NIMBY you just heard it this evening, not in my backyard. Now
alt of these objections you have heard from our neighbors are typical NIMBYisms. They
are wrought with emotion and sometimes there is little logic for what is right for the
community. And that is what I wanted to come and tell you this evening. This one
doesn't hold much water, Mr. and Mrs. Griggs and by the way can 1 see that picture that
they submitted, the big one? I will call on Mr. and Mrs. Griggs because they are the
ones who presented the list of 100 households and it was the other lady that did testify
but in their interest. We understand they presented a list of 100 households noting
objections to our proposed facility. They talked about it this evening. I call your
attention to a couple of items about the list. First of all there are only 65 households in
the impact area according to Rda County. We sent notices to all of those 65 people.
Secondly when we talked with the neighbors as has been pointed out the ones most
affected abutting our property the ones that responded to us and were home were all
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 36
supportive except for one and that was Mr. & Mrs. Jewell. We took it a step further we
had an open house to discuss the items with each of the 100 households the Griggs
has on their list, only three families showed up. One were supporters the other two were
the Griggs and the Jewells. You heard our response to these emotional charges from
our architects. I would like to submit a couple of other things. View, the Griggs talk
about a large structure, in fact everyone talks about a large structure blocking their view
of the mountains. They also talk about buildings that don't have outside treatments that
match. Mr. and Mrs. Griggs own a two story house, it is as tall if not taller than
proposed facility. I could be petty by saying they are blocking our view of the Owyhees
Mountains but I don't it is not necessary. You see they are in our backyard. Also at the
P & Z hearings the issue of protecting the view of the neighbors was not a staff
consideration. Nor was it a part of the legal findings of fact passed by the P & Z to you
even though view arguments were presented during public testimony support our claim
that this is not nor should it in this case be a consideration as a conditional use. A P & Z
Commissioner even remarked during the right to a view during Mr. Jewell's public
testimony. As to the outside treatments, our neighbors will be able to see from our
backyard, it is clear from our drawings. And I don't know if we have a set of drawings or
not, do we have a set of drawings this evening. It is Gear from our drawings that our
campus will be tastefully integrated with color matching exterior finishes, architectural
relief and consistency of design philosophy. We will be using modern building materials
which are not only more efficient than those in 1983 but are more attractive. In other
words it will all match. Conversely I would like to show you Mr. & Mrs. Griggs picture
they showed you. They don't practice what you preach if I could use a pun. This is Mr.
& Mrs. Griggs house it is true, if you will note the white picket fence from our backyard it
is the only white picket fence in the area, in fact it sticks out like a sore thumb. The rest
of the fences is a hodge podge of fence types but they all do indeed fit the area, this
one here does not. And they certainly didn't ask us if they wanted to erect that fence.
Now Mr. Jewell made the assertion in his public testimony at the P & Z and here this
evening that rather than building on our lot in a manor consistent with previous
construction that we move. Now this forum wisely told us to build our church on Cherry
Lane in 1983. We took a risk and moved here and quite frankly the building slow down
in the 80's was difficult for us because of our location. Happily we survived and as this
Council pointed out was the right thing to do. Again it is interesting to note that there
are two items on the agenda this evening from the very subdivision that these people
are talking about. They are asking for variances and plat approvals. Since we have
been in our location their subdivision has been renamed, replatted, and redesigned at
least once if not more times. There is no doubt that you will approve those actions this
evening but I wonder about all of the details of the variances of expansion if they were
known and revealed at a time when the plat was first put in. 1 doubt it and it doesn't
really matter because it is consistent with what is going on now. It makes sense to
approve it. The real world and such is the case for our construction plans. We are being
consistent with what we started in 1983. There was mention made that we were not
interested in listening to suggestions at our open house. Although it is true we did not
concede to suggestions that would have been inappropriate because of life safety
issues, code issues, issues that would have significantly decreased our utility of our
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 37
facility or those that would not meet your standards. We were open to making changes
that made sense from an aesthetic point of view and engineering standpoint and in fact
did so for another neighbor through a reasonable exchange of ideas. In fad we have
offered to install landscaping as you know on our other people's property abutting us to
help mask the building. The charges that we are insensitive it goes back to my NIMBY
statement that they are indeed emotional charges. Now I want you also to please
consider that we are building a facility for the entire community. Or 500 member
congregation is made up mostly of Meridianites we will be funding a building for this
communities use. Put another way we are building facilities for public use with private
funds. Right now our property is used for many community activities such as park and
ride, voting and drug and alcohol programs. With our expansion we will be able to offer
much more. Our project is a classic example of private money being expended for the
public good. Now it doesn't get much better than that. We are sensitive to our neighbors
and our plans show that. We are and have been part of this community for a very long
time. As part of our inherent charger we want to be able to provide for our communities
needs (End of Tape) mostly likely continue to be neighbors. This is a public meeting
and it is part of a process of an open and frank discussion that needs to take place in a
healthy society. Nobody is going to pull the wool over anybody's eyes regarding our
project it is a large project. We are asking for a conditional use permit. Through working
with the City staff the conditions are set forth according to the rules adopted by this
community a community we are a part of. You and the City staff are the check and
balance holding our feet to the fire to make sure we comply with those conditions.
Therefore we are operating within the rules established in the public forum just like this.
To be sure the objections heard this evening are NIMBY and we don't fully understand
them and now we need to get on with it. We invite everyone including the Griggs and
the Jewells as well as all of our neighbors to be part of this exciting and certainly most
worthwhile project. I urge you favorably approve our conditional use permit. Any
questions?
Cowie: Thank you, any questions?
Anderson: I just wanted to make a quick comment because I don't like the
categorization of me or anybody else as NIMBY someone who is emotionally distraught.
Maybe it is not real close to my backyard, yes I am in Haven Cove I do drive through
there. I think the structure affects more than just 65 people it affects everybody who
drives along Cherry Lane. They see a warehouse in the back of the church and that is
the fact that I want to bring up. It is not just a range of just 65 people and they mention
they weren't even looking at starting construction until Next March. I think that there is
plenty of time for maybe some review and maybe some reconsideration on their plans
that they may have in place.
Cowie: Any further?
Suzanne Johnson, 2424 W. Santa Clara Dr., Meridian, was swum by the City Attorney.
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 38
Johnson: I just have one question, what kind of ordinances or zoning prevent the
building and structure to be used as anything different than a church after it has been
abandoned by the cun'ent owners? Could there forseeably be a warehouse move
behind us after they are done?
Morrow. I think to respond, the answer to the question is that it is operating under a
conditional use permit. In the event of a conditional use permit there is a change in
ownership or a change in usage it ceases to exist. And so any new use or proposed
user has to come before the Council and P & Z and go through the same process that is
going on now. So it is a situation, for example a commercial warehouse is not
compatible even with the zone for the church.
Johnson: I just wanted to make sure that was clear.
Faye Jewell, 1438 N. Tina Marie Avenue, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jewell: I just wanted to respond to Mr. Dees comment about the Planning and Zoning
Committee. What happened was we submitted this when we purchased our house we
were given this flyer and it states that we have an unobstructed view of the mountains
and I v~rould just like to submit this to the Council.
Come: Okay, anyone else at this time?
Myer: The only last comment that I wanted to make is 1 think the best solution to this,
obviously there could be, we could debate all night about it. I think that the church
needs to sit down with those people who oppose it and try and come up with some
resolutions. The comments you made about the life safety issues and the code issues if
you built it in a different location, I don't know if that is entirely true that you can't meet
all of the code issues if it is built in a different location. 1 think that you could look at that
and see if there is some other way and maybe the construction type. You say the
construction type matches but yet other people are saying that it doesn't. So I don't
know why, it sounds like there are two differences of opinion. And maybe if they can
just talk it over together they can come up with a solution that is workable.
Corrie: Thank you Seth, anyone else new here? Would you like to answer any of the
questions that may have come up?
Woodard: I guess the one comment about us leaving the property when we max out. I
think there is a misconception here that when we get to the size that we cannot
accommodate more people that we will suddenly up and leave. That is not the way we
operate, rather we would take part of our congregation and start a second congregation
and there would always be a congregation here.
Corrie: Any questions? I have just one Larry, you mentioned early that you had a taller
building and this one that you are building is 30 foot, what was the original size?
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 39
Woodard: The one at Nampa I will have to ask the architect, 36.
Corrie: So you are dropping it down 6 feet. Okay, Council questions or discussion
before 1 close the public hearing?
Bentley: My own personal feeling is it is good to see the churches growing, it is good to
see the public take an interest in them. There are a lot of issues here that have been
brought up both in P & Z and before us tonight. I really would like to see this item tabled
and see the church people and the citizens that are surrounding that have these
problems to sit down and see if they can't work them out. The church has a right to
build on their property as long as they are within the uses that are prescribed by our
ordinances. I think they can work a little bit better with the public surrounding it and I
think they need to get together and see if they can't work something out.
Come: Any further comments? I will close the public hearing at this time. Mr.
Counselor is there any further testimony that should be in the findings of fact?
Crookston: Yes there is
Rountree: Was that an affirmative that there is additional testimony that is different?
Crookston: Yes there was, there are different documents that have been submitted at
least.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I guess that from my perspective is that this is a tremendously
difficult issue. It seems to me that if you look at it from the standpoint of who was there
first the church was there first. But by the same token there are residences there. Mr.
Dees I understand your points in terms of (inaudible) obstruct your view. But part of the
right to the enjoyment of the American dream is to have some enjoyment of where you
Live. It is also a right to vwrship where you choose to worship. It seems to me that we all
ought to take and Mr. Bentley is absolutely right we ought to take another shot here at
the groups coming together and maybe a resolution of making the thing work in the
spirit of compromise. Because very candidly I think that essentially both groups are
right. The community desperately needs the church and other churches of all faiths.
The citizens that live within the community need some right to enjoyment of their
property. It seems to me like we ought to take a run at spending some time at
committees of each and seeing if we can't come to some sort of compromise before we
as a Council make a decision. I would favor in the short term although the proper
procedure here is to require new findings of fact because of the testimony. It seems to
me like it makes some sense to have a table for 30 days given the fact that the
proposed construction is next spring and I realize that in construction matters that time
is of the essence. It seems to me that there are some overriding community issues
here. So that it might be beneficial that we table for 30 days given all the parties an
opportunity to sit down at the round table and come to some sort of agreement that will
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 40
point us in the direction that we'll be able to make a decision. Obviously an emotional
issue such as this there is never a happy part where everybody is not happy with what
decision we as a Council make. It seems to me that we try to make decisions based on
what is in the best interest of the community and the neighbors in the community. From
my perspective there is not enough guidance to take me one way or the other and I
think an honest good faith effort on the part of the church and its members and the
neighbors and their group to see if we can't come up with something that is more
pleasing to both would be time well spent. That is essentially how I feel about this Mr.
Mayor.
Rountree: Given the fact that this actually is a residential R-4 zone the Church property
is zoned R-4 and I guess I would reflect a little bit to a previous hearing we had this
evening why conditional use permits. Well I hope that particular applicant now
understands why we have conditional use permits in order to have an open discussion.
I think the issue that is pertinent to me is one of aesthetics. I appreciate the fact that the
congregation is stretching to accommodate this new life center and I have seen other
congregations and other churches in the community stretch their limits to get facilities
up and running for their folks. It seems to me that occasionally they get stretched too
much and the best desires sometimes don't get executed. I would like to see some
additional time spent with the aesthetics of this proposal. I would like at that point the
elders of the church the public relations folk deal with the issues in the neighborhood
through meetings. I do applaud your efforts I think that is an excellent effort. I think
those efforts will be successful to the extent that both parties have a full opportunity to
explore one another's issues and try to meet them. I would guess that it is probably
going to be a consensus as opposed to a general agreement amongst folks but at least
get some dialogue going along with this thing is going to look like. I would agree that
maybe we table this item for that to happen. If we can get some resolve from the
applicant in thirty days then we proceed on with action as opposed to putting us into a
.position of redrafting the findings and facts and essentially being where we are right
now. That is my thoughts on the issue. It is a difficult issue and the folks that provided
you the flyer on your home when you bought the home they aren't here tonight. We
could talk to some length about that but wee can't address that issue. It is ane of
somewhat buyer beware, but maybe we can address the issue of aesthetics.
Tolsma: I echo Charlie's sentiments and Mr. Bentley's sentiments and Mr. Morrows
sentiments. I think they have addressed everything that needs to be addressed tonight.
I think (Inaudible) just table this thing for 30 days, more of cooling off period than
anything and renegotiation period with the church folk and the neighbors and see if they
can come up with a better solution.
Morrow. That being the case Mr. Mayor, I would move that we table this item for the
request for conditional use permit for the family life center by Cherry Lane Christian
Church until our September 2 meeting.
Rountree: Second
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 41
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we table the conditional use permit for the
Cherry Lane Christian Church until the meeting of September 2 meeting, all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Corrie: I guess if you would Mr. Woodard be kind enough to set up some meetings with
the neighborhood and let them talk with each other and I think they can work that out.
ITEM #16: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION AND ZONING TO R-4
AND R-15 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY:
Come: Would a representative of Meridian Land Development Company come forward.
Charles Eddy, 4345 S. Timridge Way, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Eddy: I will try to make this short, we are getting late. The findings of fact and
conclusions of law accurately reflect all of technical aspects of this property. My
comments will be addressed to the concerns of the R-15 rezone request on the 3 acres.
The applicant is requesting the R-15 zone in the three acres to allow him some flexibility
in a final design of that piece of property. (Inaudible) the concept is somewhat difficult
to develop that works well with the lay of the land and works well with getting houses in
there in an acceptable way so people will enjoy living there. The R-15 zone has several
different allowable house sizes which can be a bonus to us. The 10°~ maximum more
1000 square feet to 1100 square feet, the 15°h maximum for 1101 to 1200 square feet
and then the 25% for 1201 to 1300 and then the 50% for larger than 1300 square feet.
We have requested in our application a concept of 15 units which would be 5 units per
acre. The zone allows for 15 units per acre but we are well below that request and just
above the R-4 allowance of 4 units per acre. Commissioner Smith at the Planning and
Zoning Commission had requested that we look at other options for this parcel and we
have done that and have developed a concept if an R-4 zone is approved for this
particular three acres we have a concept that will work for that. 1 have that here for you
(inaudible). Now to answer any questions on the annexation and zoning request,
Corrie: You are requesting an R-4 or R-4 and R-15?
Eddy: We are requesting an R-4 for 80% of the property and R-15 for the 20°k that lies
southwest of the canal. We have come up with a design there for an R-4 if that is what
the Council so wishes to approve on the property for the three acres.
Crookston: Excuse me that an alternative was it not. You are actually requesting R-15
for all of it but the R-4 and R-15 is an alternative.
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 42
Eddy: No, the R-4 was requested for 80°k of the property, everything lying NE of the
canal and the R-15 was just for the three acres to the southwest.
Corrie: Questions? Thank you, anyone from the public that would like to issue testimony
at this time?
Ben Jepson, 2820 West Pine, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jepson: I made some statements at the Planning and Zoning hearing and these are
pretty much a reiteration of those. They are listed I the findings of fact but I would like to
have them entered as record for this. My first concern is on block 16, block 39 there is a
stub at the south end of North Clara. It looks lie it is a stub for possible future
development to the south. My wife and I own that property that is directly to the south of
that and directly west of the proposed R-15 zoning. My concern is if that stub is there
and the bridge is still there that there might be a desire for the people in Haven Cove to
use that as an egress to Pine avenue. I believe that in the findings of fact it is required
that for Ada County Highway District that they put some kind of barricade across that. I
would like to see that done, I would prefer to see if possible the easement removed for
Rutan Lane. Rutan Lane right now goes through our property and provides access for
the house that is currently on that block 39, there is a house right there now. So if
possible I would like to see that easement removed. In conjunction with that also in the
findings of fact on page 5 there is a statement that concerns me. This starts on line five I
am sorry on line ten on page 5. It says, "staff commented that the bridge presently used
to access the house be used as a pedestrian access after the subdivision is competed.
Also on page 16 at the top of the page at a minimum a pedestrian walkway should be
constructed through lot 35 block 9 with half of the cost of a pedestrian bridge over the
Eight Mile Lateral paid for by the developer and so on. 1 am concerned, what is the
reason for having a pedestrian bridge across that. The land to the south is all private
property, why would we need a pedestrian bridge across Eight Mile Lateral. Is that a
City ordinance or a County Ordinance or something? The only thing that would do is
allow pedestrians to cross into our property. I don't understand why that is there.
Rountree: One possibility is that in our comprehensive plan we do provide for
pedestrian pathways in conjunction with the drains and laterals. That could access a
potential pathway along the, what is that Eight Mile Lateral on the easement and or right
of way that occupies.
Jepson: So that would be restricted for use only for the irrigation district?
Rountree: No, it would be for anybody that wanted to walk.
Jepson: So they could actually come and walk along the lateral is what you are saying
across the back of our property? And that is within the rules or the law?
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 43
Rountree: At this point that is in our comprehensive plan for consideration and
development as a City grows pathways.
Jepson: So if a pathway was put in some time down the road is that what you are
saying? So at this point would I have right to block the pathway where it comes into my
property not allow access. Do you understand what I am getting at?
Rountree: Yes, you can do whatever you want with your property:
Jepson: Well my concern is right now there is Rutan lane there and if it is no longer
needed for access to the house that is there and there is still a pedestrian walkway it
just seems like there is a perfect opportunity for people to do that.
Rountree: That is beyond my area of expertise. I don't know what the easement for that
access or ingress as to say as far as use.
Jepson: I have a concern with that and I would tike that entered. A couple other
concerns, they are proposing to put a sewer across the Eight Mile Lateral which would
come into the NW section of the proposed R-15 zoning which would provide sewer for
the if in fact they do that and it is feasible 1 would like it placed deep enough that we
could use it for our property for future development). I am not sure if that is feasible but
if it is I would like to see that done. There is also currently an open earthen ditch on the
south side of the Eight Mile lateral which is in the proposed R-15 which is used for
irrigation water to my property and a couple of properties down stream from me. I
understand that Meridian irrigation would require them to the that. On many years
there is excess water available and it is available to us if we can handle it. If possible
would like to see the tiling the pipe be made large enough to accommodate that if it was
available. I guess my biggest concern with this is the R-15. The comprehensive plan
shows that three acre section as being R-4. Most of the housing well all of the housing
along Pine in that area is single family and single story. I would hesitate to see the town
homes go in in that area, the high density housing. I would be concerned about the
traffic, the congestion, the increased noise, I would be concerned also about if we had
these tall structures there and they were backed up close to the fence I would be
concerned about litter coming over the fence and that type of thing. So in that regard I
would oppose the R-15 zoning for that, I would be more I favor of the R-4 zoning. There
was something mentioned earlier that property that abuts agricultural property is
required to have anon-combustible fence is that correct? Would that be required along
that east side of that R-15, would that also be required? I don't know if that is required
or not that is just something I heard earlier.
Come: Is there cattle in there right now or anything like that?
Jepson: No, it is just crops. There is a barbed wire fence there now that we burn every
spring along that fence line. Of course if they put in a cedar fence it would be difficult to
burn. (Inaudible) Anyway those are my concerns
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 44
Cowie: Any questions? Thank you, anyone else that would like to issue testimony?
Dave Fuller, 890 N. Ten Mile, Meridian, was swum by the City Attorney.
Fuller: First off we haven't had a chance to look at the R-4 I would like to have a
chance to look at that. Just a quick glance there that does look more presentable to the
neighbor. I am a neighbor to Jepson just west of him. The R-15 we were kind of
concerned about I told Planning and Zoning if you are going to okay it for them then I
am right down the street and you are going to have to okay it for me. They kind of
agreed and that is why they suggested backing off on it. The Planning and Zoning they
mentioned they wanted to keep that R-4 in the area I have questioned them a few times
about some storage buildings in that area but they want to keep it R-4 so we backed off
on that. My concerns are the same as Jepson's we want to either be tied and live with
the Planning & Zoning's recommendation to the developer to meet with us and try to get
along with us on his development. He thought, Planning and Zoning thought he ought to
tie us into his development. Being as we haven't done that we are concerned about
having the sewer put in deep enough. There is a portion of the land on the comer that is
probably not going to gravity flow but we would like to have the sewer put in deep
enough on the portions of the land that will gravity flow. Then the easement on Rutan
Lane which is now actually called Candy Lane, they have renamed if we are not going
to be tied into this development we do want that access eliminated. The high school
although I have kids in high school myself the high school kids are running that canal
bank and they are running them in large numbers. As the other neighbors and Haven
Cove have seen this it has become a pretty popular walk path and bike lane. As long as
it, if I could show on that map of the developer there that lane is at. What needs to be
done is the lane needs to be put on down the canal back. To bypass Mr. Jepson and
Mr. Fuller's property. This little red dotted line is the lane that they are talking about
having blocked off because it is an easement for one house. Everybody is coming and
running the loop around here down Cherry coming down the canal bank and then
cutting off here. The main reason they are doing that is because there is no maintained
driveway along the canal there. I believe if you are going to put a foot path in it should
be done by Haven Cove and it should run on the north side of the canal and come out
here and block this off until wee are tied into that development. It is not right for hundreds
of people to be cutting right through our property unless we are tied in. We know we
are going to develop rather soon probably within the next five years it depends on the
sewer somewhat and the area. I have the corner, I feel that it is going to have to go with
some kind of commercial on the comer and residential around it. Whether it be a
convenience store or whatever that is usually what they seem to put on corners now a
days. So as the City Council looks this over I hope they work with the neighbors with
us. If the developer wants to meet with me some more I am more than happy to meet
with him. And if you have any questions for me I am ready to answer them.
Cowie: Thank you Dave, anyone else from the public that would like to issue testimony
at this time?
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 45
Judith Larson, 2735 West Pine Avenue, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Larson: Now this piece of ground is right in my front window. My house faces north
Squaw Butte, so they build big houses over there, I don't have a view anymore. I
would be, this would be okay, I would prefer these kind of houses then just town houses
and a bunch of them. I guess you can't stop progress.
Corrie: Anybody else?
Eddy: I will respond to the preliminary plat questions when that hearing is open or do it
now?
Corrie: You could it now if you would like.
Eddy: Mr. Jepson and his comments, we agree with him wholeheartedly on the
pathway or the bridge. The pedestrian bridge doesn't make a whole lot of sense to build
one when there is private property across the canal. On the stub street that is built to
ACRD standard with the barricade as is stated in the findings of fact. And it is our
interpretation of the easement that it does not run with the land and that when this
development is completed that easement would be vacated because there would no
longer be a need for it. That is only for ingress/egress to the existing house. On the
pedestrian pathways, there is an existing maintenance road that goes from the house at
2930 and heads west to Cherry Lane that is I assume currently being used by the public
there as a walk way and I used it 20 years ago. As the Council knows that dealing with
the Irrigation District is difficult in trying to get them to buy off on this pathway system. It
makes sense to everybody but them. So trying to continue a pathway back towards the
east would be (inaudible) with their attitude towards it right now.
Rountree: That is the nicest I have ever heard it said
(Inaudible)
Eddy: The Nampa Meridian Irrigation District has taken a very strong stance on allowing
pathways within their right of way. They say no way no how is that going to happen.
Fuller: Why are they using it now then?
Eddy: They are using it just like they are crossing into Mr. Jepson's property just
because it is there. That is all my comments.
Fuller: What is the City's policies or planning then on these canal banks because
everybody uses them as pathways. I thought that being as the school uses it for an
athletic deal that it should be continued on east because they are already using it now
and if we block it off they are going to have go somewhere. Are they going to go back
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 46
through Haven Cove Subdivision or are they just going to have that path. The ditch
company is going to make them put in a right of way for the road for the maintenance so
they are going to use that for a pathway. But my question to the City Council is that
legal, proper, condoned?
Morrow. I guess to take a shot at answering your question is that we struggle on almost
a daily basis with Nampa Meridian as an irrigation district trying to get some consensus
as to how we are gong to treat that. Very candidly in a one mile section of ground such
as this depending on easements and who got them when and how they got them you
could have areas that would be open to public use such as is being done now with the
High School kids and their track programs or whatever it might be, and come to another
section because o the easement structure there they can't be on the ground. So very
candidly at best it is a struggle with each project. Mr. Eddy's point as Mr. Rountree
pointed out is very kindly put towards Nampa Meridian, we have a very difficult issue
every time that we deal with those easements and those access roads. From our
standpoint as a community we would like to see uses of those easements for walking
paths and jogging paths or whatever. But we are having a tough time getting there and
each one of them is a major hassle and each property given its configuration and given
the easements that are outstanding seems to be different.
Fuller: So you are telling me the overall power then is with the irrigation company.
Morrow. In some cases that is true.
Corrie: In answer to your three prong question 1 would say no, maybe and no. Anybody
else?
Glen Blaser, 3450 Stone Creek Road, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Blaser: We are trying to solve all the problems that have been mentioned here and I am
sure the engineers will do the best they can. The sewer has to go where the sewer has
to go. We are not, that isn't optional whether we put it deep or not. I would certainly be
in favor of the foot path along the canal thinking the school kids have to go to school
and there is a school on Ten Mile. If they could walk around that way it is terrible to
have to walk around and find a main street and go down the main street to school. But
of course I won't have the say about that or we won't have the say that will be
determined by you folks. Now the idea of whether that is R-15 or R-4 we will live with it
either way whatever you gentlemen decide. In Boise on Philippi Street for one block
and for two blocks at Grover Street I built what Boise called zero lot line houses. They
are all one story, 2 or 3 of them are two story but out of 15 there are about 3 two story
the rest are one story. So you drive down the street they just look like bigger houses
and yet there are two people that live in the same house. They have side yards and
garages. R-15 doesn't have to be ugly and if vwe were given that zoning we would come
back to the Council and that is our intention with a definite plan when we have
something worked out that we think would be desirable. Pine Street is going to be one
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 47
of your principle and is one of your principle streets and we think it ought to have
something aesthetically on it. It is hard to get a rectangular lot in a triangular piece of
ground and we thought that given a little latitude we could work something nicer out if
you would allow us to have a little denser zoning on that three acres facing Pine Street.
We don't intend to put 15 to the acre, 5 or 6 is what we would do at the most. With a
nice court yard I have asked two architectural firms in Boise to come up with some
ideas and one of them did and it was a two story apartment house with towers and
beautiful but that isn't the place for it. I don't definitely have anything definite in mind for
it but I assure you that I am as interested as any of you to see that whatever goes there
is pretty. Pine Street is one of your nicer streets and I think Meridian City has done an
excellent job in designing the berms and the looks of these subdivisions, I am
impressed. We would do everything we could to make it desirable. We have no intention
of encroaching on the neighbor, we want the neighbors to be happy. We want them to
not be damaged or hurt but rather to be upgraded in their value by what we build there.
So thank you very much for your time.
Corrie: Thank you Glen, anyone else from the public? At this time I wilt close the public
hearing.
Morrow. My question to the Attorney would be does this constitute based on the
testimony need for new findings?
Crookston: There are some minor changes but I don't think it is significant enough to
change the findings.
Morrow. Follow up question Mr. Mayor, Gary the issues that have been raised with
respect to sewer and the capability to sewer other parcels adjacent do you have a
thumb nail sketch of the possibilities for that area, because it is a transition area?
Smith: Yes Mr. Mayor and Councilman Morrow, the sewer line is kept at its maximum
depth as it is extended to the south. One of the requirements on this developer was to
provide a profile of approximate depth of sewer line as it crosses Eight Mile Lateral into
this designated R-15 area. If I could take a few minutes and pull that out I can give you
a depth of it.
Bentley: Mr. Mayor 1 would like to address something while Gary is doing some
research. On the fencing issue number 15 in the site specific comments states that
there would be a six foot high perimeter fence non-combustible along both sides of the
Eight Mile Lateral. I would agree that we need to have the same type of fence run down
the portion that was being looked at as R-15.
Smith: (Inaudible) side of the lateral, is that correct Charles do you know?
Eddy: I know there are nine inches of cover between the (inaudible)
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 48
Smith: It is just being extended at about four tenths the minimum grade of four tenths
percent so it is 6 foot deep at that end. I don't know how that ground goes from Eight
Mile Lateral south and west but I am assuming it is falling towards Ten Mile Road. So
you are not going to go very far with this sewer line into Mr. Jepson's property. I doubt
very seriously that it would get to yours Mr. Fuller. So your sewer is going to have to
come up from Ten Mile Road.
Fuller: How big of a line?
Smith: It is an 8 inch line.
Fuller: (Inaudible)
Smith: Yes
Fuller: (Inaudible)
Smith: It wouldn't do any good because there is an eight inch line downstream.
Crookston: Mr. Fuller could you step up to the microphone or step over to Gary's
microphone so we can pick you up on the tape.
Fuller: My question was how large the line was, he said it was eight inch. Eight inch
would handle Jepson's property, I don't know how many houses that would be whether
it would be 10, 20 or 30. He said it couldn't be put in at 10 or 12 because the existing
line further down was only 8 inch.
Morrow: I have no further questions.
Corrie: Hearing that do you wish to do something with the findings of fact and
conclusions of law that are in front of you.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, from my standpoint I think that the findings of fact and conclusions
of law that the P & Z forwarded onto us spelled out that they were interested in R-4 for
the triangular piece not R-15. I concur with that observation, I think that I would like to
make a motion that we adopt the findings of fact and contusions of law as prepared for
usbyP&Z.
Tolsma: Second
Corrie: Motion has been made and seconded that we adopt the findings of fact and
conclusions of law as presented by the Planning and Zoning Commission, any further
discussion? Roll call vote
ROLL CALL VOTE: Morrow -Yea, Bentley -Yea, Rountree -Yea, Tolsma -Yea
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 49
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Cowie: Decision or recommendation?
Morrow. The property set forth in the application needs to be approved by the City
Council for annexation and zoning under the conditions set forth in these findings of fact
and conclusions of law inGuding that the applicant or its successors, interests, assigns,
heirs, executors or personal representatives enter into a development agreement
applicable to the entire property. But if the applicant is not agreeable with these findings
of fact and conclusions of law or is not agreeable with entering into a development
agreement applicable to the entire property the property should not be annexed.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion is made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to approve the decision
and recommendation as stated, any further discussion? Alf those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we instruct the City Attomey to prepare an
annexation ordinance for the land requested and the zoning to be R-4.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded to have the Ordinance drawn up by the attorney for
an R-4 annexation and zoning, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #17: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR HAVEN
COVE SUBDIVISION NO. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
Cowie: I guess Mr. Eddy you can make somewhat of a presentation here.
Charles Eddy, 4345 S. Timridge Way, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Eddy: I would like to have all of my comments entered into the record for this public
hearing that were presented at the public hearing for the annexation and zoning.
Rountree: Has your R-4 proposal for the triangular piece been reviewed and addressed
by ACRD?
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 50
Eddy: The preliminary plat as submitted was submitted with the R-15 zone. So it has
not been reviewed by ACHD in this configuration. Although it meets all of their
requirements for size.
Corrie: Any further questions? Anybody from the public that would like to enter
testimony on the preliminary plat at this point?
Ben Jepson, 2820 W. Pine Avenue, Meridian, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Jepson: I would just like my comments from the previous hearing to be included in this
hearing.
Corrie: Thank you, anyone else from the public? At this point I will close the public
hearing, Council, I guess we need to do about the same thing we did earlier.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, pending the receipt and approval of the annexation ordinance 1
would move that we table this until our meeting of August 19.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made to table the request for the preliminary plat for Haven Cove
Subdivision No. 7 until August 19, any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #18: PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR HAVEN COVE
SUBDIVISION NO. 7 BY MERIDIAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CO.:
Corrie: At this time I will open the public hearing.
Charles Eddy, 4345 S. Timridge Way, Boise, was sworn by the City Attorney.
Eddy: I have reviewed the comments of August 1~ by staff. One item that comes to
mind that is not on these comments is the request for variance on the lot frontage of two
lots. I guess I had a question of staff if that was inadvertently left off or left off for a
reason.
Corrie: Gary?
Smith: I can't answer that question.
Morrow. Part of your application was the reduction of lot frontage on two lots?
Meridian City Council •
August 5, 1997
Page 51
Eddy: Yes, it was, we have requested a variance on the lot frontage for two lots, lot 40
block 9 and lot 8 block 14. The original application had the technical spec'rfics of those
two lots and they are also in the findings of fact and conclusions. Okay, we speak about
the frontage of the two lots on page 4 of the findings of fact, top of page four it talks
about Lot 40 block 9 has 40.08 feet of frontage at the right of way 80 feet of frontage
occurs at 42 feet from the right of way line. The total depth of that is 140 feet and the lot
area is 13,206 square feet. Lot 18 block 13 has lot frontage of 68.59 feet at the right of
way line, 27 feet from the front lot line is the location of the 80 foot frontage, the depth of
the lot is 99 feet with a total lot area of 8,330 feet. Those are the two lots that we are
requesting the variance on the frontage. The only other comment would be the block
length, the major force behind increasing this block length was the existing house we
accommodated into the plan and that forced us to put the stub street across the canal at
a length greater than 1000 feet. I believe that it exceeds 1000 feet; it is less than 1100
feet but greater than 1000. That is all my comments.
Corrie: Does anyone else want to issue testimony on this item?
Smith: Mr. Mayor, I guess 1 would be interested to know if the applicant for Mayor and
Council's information if the applicant would be willing to specify a setback on those two
lots that would give the lot 80 foot of frontage at the setback line. The reason I ask is
because our ordinance prior to the last revision required the lot front to be at the
setback the front setback line.
Morrow: Required the 80 foot to be at the front setback line if it is a 20 foot setback then
it had to be 80 feet at the 20 foot setback?
Smith: The previous ordinance was 70 feet on an R-4 zone at the 20 foot setback. In
this case they are showing an 80 foot frontage at a setback greater than 20 feet on both
lots. I assume that they are willing to locate a house at that setback if the Council
approved this variance.
Eddy: Yes we would
Morrow. So to recap then you are willing to locate the front yard setback at the 80 foot
width mark for building purposes on those two lots?
Eddy: That is correct and that will be noted on the plat.
Corrie: any further questions or discussion? I will Gose the public hearing
Morrow. I guess Mr. Mayor a question here with respect to the counselor, I know we
need findings here but do we request findings not based on this given the fact that we
have to table it or do we request the findings after it comes off the table?
Crookston: You can do it either way.
Meridian Ciry Council
August 5, 1997
Page 52
Morrow. My motion would be that we instruct the City Attorney to prepare findings of
fact and conclusions of law for the variance for Haven Cove Subdivision No. 7 by
Meridian Land Development Company. And we also table this issue to our meeting of
August 19 so we can adopt the annexation ordinance.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to direct the City Attorney
to draw up findings of fact and conclusions of law, also to table to the August 19
meeting, any further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #19: REQUEST FOR HOOK UP TO CITY SEWER FOR 3195 N. CINDER BY
GARY AND MARGARET PALMER:
Corrie: We have the letter here this is a hook up request for a temporary living quarters
for parents (inaudible). I guess they are not here at this time what is the Council's
pleasure to do in this case?
Rountree: I would just offer my opinion that I would be not particularly favorable for this
application for this purpose, it doesn't appear that there is a hardship being presented to
these folks. Without them being here to represent their case I don't know anymore than
what is in the letter. I don't see any advantage to the City to act on this request at this
point.
Morrow. I guess my position would be is that give them an opportunity at the next
meeting to make their point, to sell us on whether we want to do this or not. If I was
going to do it on the merit of the letter my response would be no we don't need to do
that. But also they need to be represented and make their case. So we could have our
City Clerk notify them that they do in fact need to be present and make a presentation.
would move to table.
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made to table item #19 until the August 19 meeting, all those in favor?
Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #20: PACKARD SUBDIVISION -LIFT STATION MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT:
Corrie: Gary do you want to address that one?
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 53
Smith: Thank you Mr. Mayor and Council members, this lift station was patterned after
the previously approved lift station maintenance agreement for the Whitestone
Subdivision. I took the approved copy that Wayne had looked at for that subdivision and
with one exception managed to get rid of Whitestone. Wayne re-reviewed this and had
some other additions that he is requesting be made. It has been submitted to the
developer's of Packard and they have signed it and sent it back. I don't know that the
requested revisions from Wayne would present a problem for the Packard Developers
but they have agreed to and signed the original submittal.
Morrow. If I may ask a question Mr. Mayor, does that mean that the document that the
development folk sign does not have the revisions that Mr. Crookston suggested?
Smith: No it didn't because I took the previously reviewed and approved addition from
Wayne and just changed the name of the subdivision and sent it out to them.
Morrow: Are these suggestions of any great substance?
Smith: I don't know it is a legal issue I guess and I am not, it doesn't affect the amount
that they are requested to pay it is some concerns that Wayne had as far as how the
transfer may take place between Packard and the homeowners association and if it
doesn't that Packard is responsible for it. I kind of thought that it was already inferred in
the body of the document but I would have to let Wayne discuss that.
Crookston: Gary is correct, I think that there at a minimum needs to be a change in the
agreement to remove the word Whitestone from the document because it is not a
Whitestone agreement it is a Packard Agreement. And I think that there needs to be
something in there that provides that if a homeowners association is not set up and
established then Packard's development company will be the have the obligation to
perform the agreement.
Smith: May I ask a question, does that mean Wayne that we need to go back and revise
the Whitestone Agreement then because it is the same, identical.
Crookston: If they have not set up their homeowners association yet I think we should.
Smith: Because that has been sent out for their signature. They were balking a# signing
it originally because of the amount and I revisited that and reduced that based upon
development within the subdivision.
Crookston: If they have set up their homeowners association I don't believe that there
is any necessity to do that. But we don't know in this case, the case that we are dealing
with now we have no idea whether or not that homeowners association will ever be set
up. I imagine that it will be we don't know that.
Meridian City Council ~ •
August 5, 1997
Page 54
Morrow. Well if I may ask the question Mr. Mayor, wasn't the homeowners association
in all subdivisions that we approved a requirement of the approval or de-annexation
takes place, not only the association but dues paying homeowners associations?
Crookston: I don't believe it is set forth that it will be de-annexed if that is not done.
Rountree: Part of the final plat approval is approval of CC&R's and that is a requirement
(inaudible)
Crookston: I am not sure that is a requirement of the approval of the final plat. I don't
think that it is. We generally get them at that time but I don't think it is a requirement, do
you know Gary if we have to approve CC&R's or a homeowners association before the
final plat is approved?
Smith: It is typically required that the Council approve the CC&R's along with the final
plat, now it doesn't always happen but it is typically required.
Crookston: I agree that it is typically required but it is not a requirement of our ordinance
that be done before the plat is approved as 1 remember it.
Smith: I couldn't speak to that specifically I don't know. Concerning this agreement I
don't think that the Packard developing people will have a problem with this addition.
They haven't had a problem with, they didn't have a problem with the agreement as I
submitted it to them for signature. So I don't think that is going to impact their signing
this agreement with these additions.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, 1 guess if I could, two comments here. One is that I don't like add on
stipulations, conditions after the fact. But in order to move this forward I guess what I
would like to move in a motion would be that vve approve the lift station maintenance
agreement, authorize the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest on the condition that
the Packard Development folk sign the new corrected agreement and if there is any
reluctance for them to sign it that they be able to come back before the City Council and
plead their case and vre take action based on that.
Bentley: Second
Come: Okay you heard the motion by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Bentley, is there any
further discussion? All those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #21: LATE COMERS AGREEMENT WITH STOR-MOR SYSTEMS INC. AND
TREASURE VALLEY BAPTIST CHURCH:
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 55
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council, this agreement has been laying around I guess you can
say for a long time. The developers of Stor-Mor Systems and Treasure Valley Baptist
Church had been beating us up pretty bad about getting something done. So, we finally
in a public works department took a copy of a previously approved agreement from
another project and put together language that we felt was appropriate for repayment of
the developers cost portion thereof and submitted that to the developers. They
reviewed it and signed it and sent it back. We got Wayne's comments and when I sat
down and reviewed them with Bruce Freckleton it doesn't look to me like they are of a
substance that it would cause a problem to the developer in recovering his cost or
portions thereof. We are talking about a pretty small area. 1 just kind of hate to go back
to the developers again and have them re-sign something that has taken so long to get
to them in the first place. 1 guess it would be my thought that we unless Wayne has
some really strong feelings that we created a real problem here in going ahead. And I
apologize to Wayne in doing that but we just needed to get, 1 bought a shed from Greg
Brown and before I could write him the check for the shed he was asking where his late
comers agreement was. Anyway that kind of prodded me to push it out the door
because we just had to get it done.
Morrow. How long has it been?
Smith: Well I asked Bruce Freckleton and I think it has been about a year since the
project was complete. We have had a couple of people hook up out there, we have
written an assessment a reassessment agreement for them to sign so that they
understood that late comers agreement was forthcoming and that they would be subject
to that late comers cost that being Van Auker's development. He has known that later
comers agreement was going to be assessed and he has agreed to pay it when it was
made available. That has been the only one.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I want to offer an editorial comment on this particular issue. Trying
to do stuff after the fact is ludicrous, ~ talk about the definition of consumerism this is
certainly a definition of consumerism. We have dropped the ball very badly here and we
should not be conducting business in this manner when we are going to do a late
comers agreement if in fact the project finishes the first of July we ought to have that
late comers agreement in place by the first of August and that ought to be the
performance standard. The fact that you are going to have a reassessment thing
signed may or may not mean you are going to get your money. Because if you don't
have the money and they have the service and you have to fight it out in court who pays
all of that. We as a city pay that so that is no fair. The point is that I guess there here is
a perfect example of consumerism that we need to address and we need to be
substantially better at it then what we are right now. So that is the end of my editorial
comment.
Crookston: I don't feel that my comments are significant enough like I said the total
dollar amount of the improvement should have stated in the agreement and the total
dollar amounts that Stor-Mor and Treasure Valley Baptist Church should be reimbursed.
Meridian City Council •
August 5, 1997
Page 56
I don't think that is significant enough to redo the agreement. I would like to see that in
the other agreements that we do.
Smith: We did have on the very last page the developer's contribution which was the
total at the top it is not called out as a total but it is the total cost of the project.
Crookston: I think that is satisfactory.
Smith: I think it is covered it is just not stated as the total cost.
Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would move that we accept the late comer agreement as
proposed and authorize the Mayor to sign and the clerk to attest.
Bentley: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we approve the late comers agreement with
the Mayor to sign and the City Clerk to attest, any further comments? All those in
favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I have a question on that item, do we have a standard form letter for
putting together these late comer agreements where we just fill in the amounts
(inaudible) and the correct wording for the parties involved?
Crookston: Bruce Freckleton and I have changed the agreement somewhat, pretty
much now we have a standard agreement.
Bentley: On the standard agreement is there a space for putting the total cost and who
is reimbursed what amounts? If not I am just saying we need to incorporate that so we
don't have the missing issues that is all.
Crookston: I agree.
ITEM #22: WATER/SEWER/TRASH DELINQUENCIES:
Cowie: This is the delinquency for tum off schedule for 8-13-97. This is to inform you in
writing if you choose to you have the right to apre-determination hearing tonight at 7:30
p.m. August 5, 1997 before the Mayor and City Council to appear in person and be
judged on the facts and defend the claim made by the City that your water, sewer and
trash bill is delinquent. You may retain counsel. This service will be discontinued on 8-
13-97 unless payment is received in full. Is there anyone present that wishes to contest
their water, sewer and trash delinquency? You are hereby informed that you may
appeal to have the decision of the City reviewed by the Fourth Judicial District Court
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 57
pursuant to Idaho code. Even though they appeal their water will be shut off. The
amount of the turn off list is $35,710.04.
Bentley: I make a motion we approve the water and sewer and trash delinquency turn
off list.
Tolsma: Second
Come: Motion made and seconded that we approve the water, sewer and trash
delinquency turn off list, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Smith: Mr. Mayor, I have a verbal proposal from our Water Superintendent to increase
the amount of the turn off fee from $10 to $50. This is an ordinance as it exists right now
an ordinance requirement or penalty. If that is changed then it has to go through the
public hearing process for an amendment to the ordinance. It is I think, I shouldn't say
typically but there are a lot of people on the tum off list that are consistently on the turn
off list. It is getting to be a big job turning off all of those that are not paying their water
and sewer bill. What is the procedure for proposing this to the Council?
Morrow. I think if I might take a crack at that Mr. Mayor I think the proper procedure is
that we discuss that at the strategic planning meeting as we have done other things and
it if the determination amongst the Council is that we want to increase that fee and to
what amount then we draft it up into Ordinance fashion or amendment fashion whatever
is proper and go through the public hearing process and then adopt and I certainly don't
have a problem from my standpoint of getting that on our strategic planning agenda for
our next meeting this month.
Smith: Thank you
Corrie: I noticed there are quite a few that play the game here.
ITEM #23: APPROVE BILLS:
Morrow. So moved
Rountree: Second
Corrie: Motion made and seconded we approve the bills, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
ITEM #24: DEPARTMENT REPORTS:
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 58
Come: Mr. Smith?
Smith: Mr. Mayor and Council 1 have got a couple of things, the highway district is
requesting a temporary construction easement for some work they are going to do on
Ten Mile Road where Creason Lateral crosses which is at our entrance to the waste
water treatment plant. They need a temporary construction easement for work that they
would be doing on the ends of the pipe that they are going to replace for the Creason
Lateral. They have submitted an agreement to John today they wanted it signed for the
temporary easement and they will pay the City $150 for that easement. I brought it to
you tonight because I thought that Mayor and Council should direct the Mayor and Clerk
to sign that document.
Morrow. That would be correct, I guess Mr. Mayor what is the benefit to us for charging
another governmental entity $150 for temporary easement. It is coming out of one
taxpayer pocket right into another one.
Smith: I don't know if there is any benefit Councilman, there is a benefit to us for the
project because we are going to be able to increase the radius of that tum into the plant
from, that is south bound traffic into the plat so that is going to help us there.
Morzow. I guess my motion would be to tell them to keep their $150 and authorize the
Mayor to sign and the Clerk to attest and we get on with the construction that needs to
be done.
Corrie: Did you say ACRD, perhaps we could trade that for the impact fee.
Rountree: I will second that and we wilt help when we can.
Corrie: Motion has been made by Mr. Morrow, second by Mr. Rountree to have the
monies deferred on the fees, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Smith: The other thing I have just real quickly, at the Troutner Business Park some time
ago you authorized a building permit to be issued to USDA for a building and that would
be on their original parcel of ground a one time permit. USDA has pulled up and gone
somewhere else. The developer wants to transfer that building permit to Keller Olson
who is, Keller is a consulting engineer that we use at the waste water plant and Olson is
a CPA, for a building to construct in that Troutner Business park. They are right now
beginning construction on a sewer line in that park, they have excavated the roads I
believe and they are starting to build a sewer line. Keller is faced with a end of the year
lease termination where he is in Boise and he needs to move. They have written a letter
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 59
Morrow. Gary we approved this at our last meeting, you brought this up under
department reports at our last meeting. We authorized the building permit to be issued
or substituted as a Council.
Smith: Right, and you asked for a letter from Keller outlining what he was going to do,
when he needed to do it and also that Troutner-Ballantyne approved of this transfer and
we got that today. But the second part of this is the Fire Marshall is requiring that there
be three fire hydrants within 500 feet of the building according to the fire code. We are
not sure in terms of the sequence of events in construction of the water system and the
fire hydrants just how that is going to work out with a building, it is not going to work out
with a building permit being issued for Keller Olson building because they are going to
have if they get a building permit and I understand they have their plans done, they
haven't submitted them to the City of Meridian. But in several weeks or four weeks by
the time they get the plans back from the plan checker they are still not going to have
water out there and they are going to want to go to work.
Morrow. And the question is? Do we allow them to go ahead and have the building
permit without water being on the site?
Smith: Right, there is a fire hydrant within 300 feet of the site, but there aren't three fire
hydrants in accordance with what is Skip's review of the fire code. I have got copies of
a little dissertation that Bruce Freckleton put together on the history of this thing. The
fire protection is the issue in accordance with the fire code.
Morrow. I guess from my standpoint is that we have a situation here where those things
are going to be somewhat compatible with the ongoing development. That one fire
hydrant a couple hundred feet away or 300 feet away given the tanker capacity that we
have and the fact that the building that is under construction means to me that there is
no reason why that project can't go forth. Common sense would tell you that there is not
a lot of risk here. In any even the risk is being taken by the building owner. As long as
he or she is aware of that then so be it.
Corrie: Are they putting it in letter form or written form that they are taking responsibility
if there is a fire? I don't know, counselor, if it is in the ordinance would we not have
some liability there?
Crookston: Yes
Corrie: Could we get a letter from them to say they were assuming responsibility?
Smith: I can certainly ask, they haven't given that letter yet, but I can certainly ask.
Morrow: I guess the other thing is that as a Council we have the option of waiving any
ordinance or any type of requirement or temporarily setting it off or whatever in terms of
~ i
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 60
Crookston: They have to request that.
(Inaudible)
Tolsma: Gary, is this building they are planning out there as big as the one that USDA
was going to put out there?
Smith: It is larger than what USDA was proposing and that is why the increased fire flow
demand. We went from 1900 gallons per minutes to 2750 and based on the fire code
the square footage (inaudible)
Tolsma: Will they have these hydrants in place (inaudible) street that they are putting in
there? They have to have the street done before they can work in there anyway.
Smith: Yes, well they have to have the water mains installed and the road base down so
they can get the fire truck in there or an emergency vehicle into the site before we can
issue a building permit. That is a standard requirement.
Tolsma: (Inaudible)
Smith: They would but there is just some concern that they are going to be ahead of just
kind based on the way they are going I guess that they are going to be ahead with their
building ahead of the water line construction, ahead of the roadway.
Tolsma: If there isn't a road to get in there how are they going to get in and out of there?
Smith: Well I think the USDA was going to build a little road off to the side of the right of
way that was to be dedicated. They were going to create their own access road. In fact
they were running a service in there because they were going to be so far ahead of this
subdivision USDA was going to run the service in there all the way from Franklin Road
for water. And Skip was accepting the fire hydrant on Franklin Road for fire protection
for that building. So with that fire hydrant on Franklin Road with a separate access and
with the water service from Franklin Road USDA building was a go. But with the size
increase on this building that is where it is throwing everybody a curve. It is just
Tolsma: So if they wrote us a letter stating they accept all responsibility for fire would
that relieve us?
Crookston: It is helpful but it doesn't totally remove any chance that a court could find
that the City of Meridian has liability.
Tolsma: How do we resolve this?
Crookston :You have them put in the fire hydrant.
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 61
Morrow. Ron the resolution to this, my suspicion is we are talking about a few days one
way or the other here. The point is just like CESCO where you go over and shut down a
job because it is steel and concrete (inaudible) put the thing behind schedule. Here we
are talking about it appears an issue where you have (inaudible) pouring concrete or
slab forwards what is to burn? The other thing is you are never going to be out of a
liability issue, personally, professionally or as a government. So the deal is if they send
us a letter that they are accepting all of the risk (End of Tape)
Smith: (Inaudible) said in his letter from Keller and Associates that they are planning on
breaking ground September 1~.
Rountree: And above that it says the water lines are scheduled to be installed in late
August.
Smith: That is the schedule but today we found that their planned location of a sewer
line in Franklin Road was right on top of the telephone lines so the are going to have to
redo something out there. So we are looking for a little directive I guess in terms
Tolsma: I think if we are only talking a couple of weeks (inaudible) they give us a letter
saying they are going to accept the responsibility and they are already a couple of
weeks behind I don't see any problem with that I don't have any problem with it.
Rountree: Do we know what kind of construction this is?
Smith: I don't, (Inaudible) I don't know what that is. Perhaps at the point they break
ground and they excavate and they build their foundation and floor a couple of weeks
goes by there and maybe we are going to be Gose with getting the water line in.
Cowie: And they are going to have the road so they can get a truck in there ff it does
bum.
Smith: They would have to yes they would have to have gravel.
Tolsma: If they are pouring concrete and digging foundations and pouring foundations
and everything like that (Inaudible) 1 would say stop until they get it all the way. But if
they are constructing the water mains and the sewer mains and the road project at the
same time they are excavating for pouring concrete and there are no burnable materials
there I don't see any reason why they can't go forvvard.
Cowie: They are engineers they ought to be able to figure that out Gary.
Smith: That seems to be the question on some of these other buildings too.
Morrow. What, engineers?
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 62
Smith: No, burnable, flammable.
Bentley: Do you have what you need?
Smith: Yes sir, we can go ahead
Corrie: Get a letter.
Smith: As far as liability goes?
Corrie: We want a letter from what I understand they want a letter accepting some of
the responsibility.
Tolsma: Or they will build it (inaudible)
Smith: Thank you
Come: Mr. Crookston?
Crookston: I do have proposed by-laws for the Parks and Recreation commission that I
will pass out to you. Bob I also have a response to your inquiry regarding the 911. All I
have right now is the original documents so I will make copies and give them to you.
Come: You can do it tomorrow that is fine and then we will get (inaudible)
Crookston: Then I do have proposed ordinances on ordinance number 760 and 761 the
traffic safety commission and the commissions, boards and committees. And that is all I
have.
Corrie: I have one question for you, school district insurance agreement, where are we
on that?
Crookston: That is something that 1 need to get to. I have been dealing with these other
things I haven't been able to get to it.
Corrie: How about, that is fine. We need, as soon as you get (inaudible) Mr. Morrow?
Morrow. Nothing
Corrie: Mr. Bentley?
Bentley: t have two things, a little humor for you I hear that our illustrious sheriff is
looking to maybe put the 911 funds on cell funds. Secondly I passed out or we
discussed the last time 1 was here a little bit about the helping the fund for the commuter
train. I need to know what people's positions are whether there is a chance down the
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 63
road. We have talked about preserving the rail road right of way out here and I think we
need to put forth some monies into this project to help solidify the fact that we want to
preserve this corridor. There is a chance down the road that we can get 80°~ money
from the feds to buy it. t think the valley is going to have to pull together to pull this
corridor thing of. We will need to make a decision on this before too long as to what we
have going in the budget as to what we put forth.
Morrow. I guess to answer you question from my perspective the answer will become
apparent as we get into the budget process (inaudible).
Bentley: I just wanted to remind everybody.
Corrie: You might want to write up a proposal. Mr. Rountree?
Rountree: Gary do you have any information on the budget adjustment for Parks and
Recreation for the softball field? I did not bring that letter
Smith: For the softball field at Story Park?
Rountree: There we go, I knew somebody would have this rascal. I wanted to,
everybody has got it, everybody has had an opportunity to review it. I guess if there are
any comments on that and if not I would propose that we go ahead and advance the
labor and materials to go ahead and get that softball field done.
Morrow. Second
Corrie: Motion made and second, discussion?
Smith: Mr. Mayor, we need to because we don't have the funds budgeted in the line
item for capital improvements in the park we need to transfer monies from a line item
that we do have funds into the capital improvements.
Rountree: Which is outlined in this letter and everybody has had an opportunity to
review.
Smith: I am sorry I didn't realize that was the letter you were referring to.
Rountree: I forgot mine but everybody else remembered theirs. I do have a point of
discussion on that is that do we know that we have sufficient to get a full size I have had
some people tell me that it is not big enough.
Smith: Well, the only person that I have heard that from is Dennis saying that Dave
Costello told him it wasn't big enough and they were going down there today and lay the
tapes out and find out between them that yes or no.
Meridian City Council
August 5, 1997
Page 64
Rountree: It is 300 feet and that is the foul line length.
Smith: We will have to use a restricted ball.
Rountree: Resolving that point
Smith: If it is resolvable to locate at that point then yes, otherwise there is another
counter proposal to turn the soft ball field face it south from presently where it is or a
little north of where it is which would impact the picnic shelter a little bit, but not the way
it does now. So the location hasn't been resolved how we are going to do it but we are
going to do it.
Cowie: All those in favor of the motion? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
Rountree: I have a question for Wayne, did you ever hear from ICRMP on the one
incident or multiple incidents of injuries with the agreement with St. Luke's.
Crookston: No
Rountree: Did Will or somebody get a chance to check before they left town?
Crookston: Not that 1 am aware of.
Rountree: I think that he gave you the name of a contact person.
Crookston: He gave me the name
Rountree: I will make contact with them if that will help but you .need to get that thing
(inaudible) I had hoped that we would be able to advance approval of that agreement.
Cowie: Mr. Tolsma?
Tolsma: Nothing
Cowie: The 19~h will be the dedication of that field that is Cox field, somebody kept
saying it was Cox memorial field and I said the guy hasn't passed away yet so we can't
put it as memorial. I don't have anything I would request that we could go into executive
session for about five minutes.
Morrow. So moved
Tolsma: Second
Meridian City Council • •
August 5, 1997
Page 65
Cowie: Motion made and seconded all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Cowie: We are back from Executive Session the time is 12:20, we discussed some
purchases of property. I will entertain a motion that we adjourn.
Morrow. So moved
Rountree: Second
Cowie: Motion made and second that we adjourn, all those in favor? Opposed?
MOTION CARRIED: All Yea
MEETING ADJOURNED AT 12:20 A.M.
(TAPE ON FILE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS)
ATTEST:
````,`,~pp~tl~f~q~a~'''',
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR., CI CLERK
8$AL
~o,9~T,ss •, ~.~?
APPROVED:
• HUB OF TREASURE VALLEY •
WILLIAM G. BERG, JR.. City Clerk
JANICE L. SMITH, City Treasurer
GARY D. SMITH, P.E., City Engineer
BRUCE D. STUART, Water Works Supt.
JOHN T SHAWCROFT, Waste Water Supt.
DENNIS J. SUMMERS, Parks Supt.
SHARI L. STILES, P 8 2 Atlministre[or
PATTY A. WOLFKIEL, DMV Supervisor
KENNETH W. BOWERS, Fire Chief
W.L. 'BILL' GORDON, Pollee Chef
WAYNE G. CROOKSTON, JR., Attorney
A Good Place to Live
CITY OF MERIDIAN
33 EAST IDAHO
MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642
Phone (208) 688-4433 • FAX (208) 887-0813
Public WorksBuilding Deparhnent (208) 887-2211
Motor Vehicle/Drivets License (208) 888-0443
ROBERT D. CORRIE
Mayor
MEMORANDUM:
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Bruce Freckleton, Assistant to City Engineer ~'
I.~;C' f,,~et
<; °-p~r ~
~ i~l AC-OUNCIL MEMBERC t
-~~ .
WALT W. MORROW, Presidem
RONALD R. TOLSMA
CHARLES M. ROUNTREE
GLENN R. BENTLEY
P 8 Z COMMISCION
JIM JOHNSON, Chairman
GREG OSLUND
MALCOLM MACCOY
KEITH BORUP
RON MANNING
August 1, 1997
Re: KELLER & OLSEN OFFICE BUILDING -Troutner Business Pazk
(Request for building permit prior to final plat, and development improvements)
A request was brought before the Council July 15, 1997, under department reports, for a building
permit on the property being developed as Troutner Business Park, (see attached minutes). The
request was brought before Council because the subdivision plat has not yet been recorded into Ada
County records, nor have the subdivisions improvements been installed.
Prior to this request, there was a similar request, on the same property, for the construction of a new
office building for the United States Department of Agriculture /CFSA. That request was made prior
to the property being annexed into the City. The applicant was going through Ada County for their
building permit, however the County conditioned the approval on the issuance of a letter by the City
for temporary water service to the site. A temporary road was also to be built to the construction
site. Building plans were submitted to the Meridian Fire Department for review. It was determined
during that review, that the type of occupancy and construction for the USDA building, would
requee a fire flow of 1900 gallons per minute. The Meridian Fire Marshal also required that the fire
flow be available prior to building construction, and that an all weather access road, capable of
supporting a fire truck, would be butlt into the job site, per the Uniform Fire Code, (see attached fire
department plan check report). With these requirements, a water man3 would have to be installed into
the development with a fire hydrant neaz the job site. For one reason or another the USDA building
plans never materialized and the developers have moved forwazd with the annexation and platting of
Troutner Busutess Park. The plat has received approvals from Council and development comYrtiction
has commenced.
The Fire Marshal has reviewed the plans associated with the newest request for a buikling permit. His
plan check report to the Building Department states that the required Sre flow is 2750 gallons per
minute. He also goes onto say that 3 fire hydrants need to be installed, (see attached fire department
plan check report). T1Te higher flows are required in part because of the larger floor area, over twice
that of the USDA building. His requirement for the fire flow to be available prior to building
construction, and that an all weather access road, capable of supporting a fire truck, is still the same.
The purpose of this memorandum at this time, is to inform Council of the situation that exists, and
to request some guidance on how to proceed. As stated above, the development is under
Mayor & Council
August 5, 1997
Page 2
construction, however, the water mains have not been installed. As per Council's directive the
developer has drafted a letter stating that USDA is not going to use their one time permit that
requests that we approved and insert the Keller project in it's place. We can now proceed with the
bu>7ding plan review process, however we are unclear as to what Council's desire is pertaining to the
issuance of the permit.
Meridian City Council •
July 15, 1997
Page 44
with that we need to be the ones installing the fence on our property because it is then
our fence and they can't legally (Inaudible).
Rountree: I will give you my view Gary, if we are going to fence it fence it, if we are
going to have an opening in every residence let's not even both with the expense of the
fence and gates.
Smith: Thank you, the last item I have is, excuse me second to the last item. Jim Keller
called me today concerning Troutner Business Park, Keller is the engineer on the
subdivision, that is the one on the south side of Franklin, just east of Franklin Square
Subdivision. He has plans to relocate his office from Boise to Meridian and build in that
subdivision. He has run into a problem with timing, he has to be out of his present
location by December of this year. So he is in a crunch to get something started out
here. He has asked for a building permit to be issued ahead or the plat recording. I
asked him about the USDA building and he said that building project has gone away. It
is not going to happen there was some kind of a problem. He told me what he thought it
was but it didn't make much sense to me. Anyway, they are, they have plans approved,
they have preconstruction meeting has been held for sewer and water and they are
going to start sewer tomorrow start digging sewer tomorrow morning. So they are
moving ahead with the on site improvements. He has talked to the owner, the owner is
willing to give him permission to receive or apply for and receive their one time building
permit on that parcel of ground. I talked to Shari about it and she suggested that I come
and visit with you and see if you had any problems with them proceeding. I think we did
something similar for the Ashford Greens folks so they could get their parade home,
approve that building permit before the plat was recorded.
Rountree: What is the schedule on the recording of the final plat?
Smith: I don't know, I don't know how far along they are. I haven't seen the plat in my
office yet, it hasn't come through, the mylars. I don't know what the schedule is.
Morrow. It seems to me the resolution is fairly simple. Just have the developer send us
a letter that USDA is not going to use their one time permit that we approved.and insert
the Keller project in its place and let's be on down the road.
Rountree:. I agree
Smith: Do you want him to make plans for an alternative as far as Sewer and water just
in case, I can't imagine that it is not going to happen but we did that for USDA. They
had a septic tank system designed and they had a separate water line run from Franklin
Road all the way in just to stay ahead of the street improvements. Now I can talk to Jim
about that if you want me to, just to get his feeling on where he is going to be in life and
where the improvements are going to be. But they should go pretty fast now that they
have started. I will do that. Thank you, as I mentioned earlier when Packard
Subdivision was before you I have a Packard Subdivision lift station maintenance
1~IERIDI<4N FIRE DEPART~TEiv-T'
PLAN CHECK REPORT
PPOJECT
DESCRIPTIOVS
FLOOR AREA. OCCCPANT LOAD:v S~ fY"PE UCC L~P.~'
Oii'\'ER:
day'*'~TOTICE~~* BEFORE :a\",c;CCtTP.4NCYCERTIFIC:;TL-°I~APPROVEDBY
THE MERIDIAN FIRE DEPT. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE'~4ET:
L IN:iTaI.L ::ADDRESS NtTI~D3ERS" UN EVERY BUILDING,HOi.;SE UR APARTNfEivT
SO AS 'fU BE ('I_EARLY VISIBLE FROM THE STREET. NCn(BERS SHALL BE A
i<1L'~lIAdLThI OF 3.S" HIGH IN ACCORDANCE WITH MERiDI a N c^;7'y URDIN.4i~Ii'E.
~ INSTALL "FIRE EYITP:GUISHER" iN :;000RDANCE WITH ~'..;=.."~. P:\ddPHL~:
lC1 (NOTE: MUST BE iVZTHIN ?j' REA('H UN .4LL LE`: E_.S}.
DO FIRE HYDRANTS NEED TU BE INSTALLED UR .4DDL-D:' '.'ES \O
IF YES, HOW' MANY HYDRANTS RE RED 4ND iV c>c,aTIUT`rs
ON PLOTPi.4N Ac' c'a_..,,, o . pl.. ~ a 1 ,,._
~• :;L.L E?S1' SIGNS .47~''i) E,4IERGENCY LIGHTING iS Ti) Fic is"::i i:;LLED::
~• IS A FIRE SPRINKLER SI'STEI•I REQLrIRED:' 1'ES ~O
~' REC' ~ZR£D iT HAS TU BE CHECKED BI' STATE FI t5ii_~i.S .?;-L?CE
AND n4EET N.F.C.-t3. i SEE :4TT.-1CHED FORMt
6. IS A fII2E :4L.4R1tS SY"STEI~i REQUIRED" YES ~'O
[F YFS. SYSTEI\i AS-BUILT SPECIF7CATIUNS ARE ;. SLB.\IIT: ~ TU THE
''rRE DfiP:\12TMENT.:;NNUNCIA"['UR P,';NELS AI2E TO 3~ ('LE:IRI.Y r41.4RKED
iL',h;vrl:`t i~:i3 i(;,\C D£5CRIPT!(i;~i:i. i.r.. BLDG. DL\(7(2:L\4 4i-iTrl i):,T;.1VED
~/~ ZJNE:;RL•:;S .;.ND EQ'_'IY!\{ENT L~:'C.4TIU~lS.
7:) IiEY B()K }Z~\pID E\"I'RY SY$TE~~I TO BE I\ST~ILI.I~..D iLE-C Y.i 90?.t01
r-z _..,~._ , ~,..
w~ .
~° ~ WS ~A~AccT`•~ 2p~7
MERIDIAN FIRE DEPARTMENT
PLAN CHECK REPORT
PROJECT
FLOOR
***NOTICE*** BEFORE qN "occvPANCY CERTIFICATE" Is APPROVED BY
THE MERIDIAN FIRE DEPT. THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS SHALL BE MET:
INSTALL :ADDRESS NUMBERS" ON EVERY BUILDING,FiOUSE OR APARTMENT
SO AS TO BE CLEARLY VISIBT .R PROM TfE; STREET', NUMBERS SHALL BE A
MINIMUM OF 3.5" HIGH IN ACCORDANCE WITH MERIDIAN CTf Y ORDINANCE.
INSTALL "FIRE EXTINGUISHER" IN ACCORDANCE WITH N.F.P.A. PAMPHI.ET
# 10 (NOTE: MUST BE WITHIN 75' REACH ON ALL LEVELS),
3.
DO FIRE HYDRANTS NEED TO BE INSTALLED
IF YES, HOW MANY HYD $
ON PLOT PLAN Co „~fG;f'' F.~ ~~,.~~
ADDED? NO
.AND ATIONS
5. IS A PIKE SPRII~iIQ.ER SYSTEM REQUIRID? YES NO
IF REQUIItED IT HAS TO BE CHECKED BY STATE SHALS OFFICE
AND MEET N.F.C: 13. (SEE ATTACHED FORM)
' 6. IS A FIRE ALARM SYSTEM REQUIRED? YES NO
IF YES, SYSTEM AS BUILT SPECIFICATIONS ARE SUBMTiTED TO THE
P1RE DEPARTMENT. ANNUNCIATOR PANELS ARE TO BE CLEARLY MARKED
IDENTIFYING ?,ONE DESCRIPTIONS. i.e.. BLDG. DIAGRAM WITTi OLTTLINID
7ANE AREAS AND EQUIPMENT LOCATIONS.
BEY BOX RAPID ENTRY SYS'T'EM TO BE INSTALLED (UFC 94 902.40)
COMMENTS
PLAN CHECKED BY: DATE ~/3//9~
F1EI.D INSPECTOR, -> >
DATE OCCUPIED: •
ALL EXIT SIGNS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING IS TO BE INSTALLED! !
' RUG. 5.1997 12~ 16PM f~LLlJ2 RSSOCIRTES ItIC
•
~KELLER
ASSOCIATL~S, INC.
August S, 1997
Mr. Gary Smith, P.E.
City oaf Meridian
Department of Public Works
33 East Idaho
Meridian, Idaho 83864
Re: Keller Aasoctiates, Inc. Banding
Dear Gary:
• 110.151 P.2
RECEIVED
AUG 0 5 1997
6ERIgAN CITY lxiGSEER
Per our conversation to assist in expediting approval of the referenced project, we are providing
dre following information;
• I.etoer' from the Troutner Business Park developer requuting that the previous waiver
pt+ovidad to USDA by the City be transferred W tic SA building.
• Troutnet Business Park oonsttuaron aehedule.
• Them is an existing fine hydrant oa Franklin Road that is s&gluly over 300 fed fmm the KA
building sites Also, water lines are scheduled for instailatiAn in late August.
• KA has already bid our building project and our tentative gzoundbreaking is scheduled for
September 1, 1997 providing pmjed approval is given by the City. Constmction completion
is scheduled for December 31,1997.
• KA's current rental agreement axpiros on December 31, 1997 at our current place of
business. We have extended ors lease several times ahnady and rho building owner has
indicated that we must either bo out by December 31, 1997 or commit m a new long term
lease.
)f you have need any further information, please !d me know. Tim is cmtontly on vacation and
wiIl be retnnming on August 11,1997. .
veiny Tnmly Yours,
KEId.EIt ASSOCIATES, INC
Dennis Suikhonen
ca rrm Ke31eQ, Sralra Assoclatea, Inc.
A COMIFANY OFPROFFdSIOprALENCINEE1tS AND SC>BNT15'rS
r~t,t,Ett AssoctA~s, tNC. sus a6NtAMpV LwNE SUITE rti5 eors2, roAlro same i cios) 57s-x992
fem. 5.1997 12~ 17PM I~LLER fiSSOCIfiTES INC • N0.151 P.3
•
~ ~ m[.tVER
O Y M M E M C, A L R i A L r i TAT E
July 21, 1997
Mr. William Berg
City Clerk
City of Meridian .
850 W. Idaho Street -
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: Troutner $„~+*+~~ Park
Dear W$I;
The p~apose of this letter is is inform you the U.S. beparCneat ofAgieultri<e has
decided nest to build a burldiag on Block 2,.Lot 2iof Troutaer $~~~~*~ Pads. The (TSDA
has deoemoined that, is order to save money, it will'not have offices within 20 miles of
each other. This •*+ry+*= that the only USDA offices is the Treasure Valley will be in
Caldwell and Boise. The USDA will vacate ail other spaces as their leases expire.
As you know, the City of Meridian was watking to'accommodate the USDA by waiving
the requirement that thcfinal plat must be reeorded~pnorto reviewing the consntrction
pbms. I am re4uestin$ that this waives' be taasfeised from BIock 2, Lot 2 >n Black I, Lot
3. Jam Keller wad Reid Olsen are wnstnu~ring a 10,000 SP office budding on this lot.
The building meets ail regttirements of the LO zotring, the Development Agreement
between the City and Trouhler $usiness Pads, end Meridian City Code. For the sake of
time. we ask that the waiver be ltansftrrCd.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have airy questions about this roquest. Thank
Yon in advance £or yoia cooperation. I appreciate Your help.
Sincerely,
Mi L J. tyre
Troutner Basiness Perk
ce: Jun Keller /
e.vaewp - Ma0atemsnt
Main OSry!! 79+1 W!rt RIRe.... 91.vet. Sale 110 eaaa. IGaa.'lexo+ aAlM 301-be-+600 Faa ]Ob)xe•+0+!
0+N. Rewash Cen,v1 PAln! x01•)TS-{f 4, Saa xoeasr-e4ax
I
RLIG. 5.1997
i
,...;;
. • ~ ,L
17PM ~ RSSOCIRlES INC
..~ .~ y
i y J" ~
~,~.. .. i
H ~~ s
~~•
~.. , • f
i\~} ~ •y1111 ..
•
N0.151 P.4
~~ .
•n ~
oxDSNANCS No._
AN ORDINANCE OF THS CITY OF MHRIDIAN AMENDING AND CHANGING THS
ZONING OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THB CITY OF MERIDIAN WHICH IS
DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN TH8 NB 1/4, SW 1/4,
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGB 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, IN THS
CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of
Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of
said City to emend and chnnge the zoning from R-4 Low Density
Residential to R-8 Medium High Density Residential, for the
following described parcels
A tract of land located in the NS~t, SW~t, Section 12,
Township 3 N, Range 1 W, Boise Meridian (B.M.), in the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; more fully
described as follows:
Beginning at the center ~tcorner of Section 12, Township
3 N, Range 1 W, B.M.; thence running S 00°00'00" S along
the North-South center section line of the above said
Section 12 a distance of 687.50 ft. to a point on the
South right-of-way line of Broadway Ave. which is the
"Real Point of Beginning"; thence running S 00°00'00" 8
a distance of 296.95 ft. to a point which lies 125.00
ft. from the centerline of the U.P.R.R.; thence running
N 89°05'59" W a distance of 659.49 ft. to a point;
thence running N 00°00'00" 8 a distance of 483.35 ft. to
a point; thence running N 89°56'30" 8 a distance of
135.00 ft. to a point; thence running N 00°00'00" S a
distance of 335.07 ft. to a point; thence running N
89°56'30" S a distance of 359.42 ft. to a point on the
West right-of-way line of NW 8th Street; thence running
S 00°00'00" E along the Weat right-of-way line of NW 8th
Street a distance of 532.45 ft. to a point on the South
right-of-way line of Broadway Ave.; thence running N
84°57'30" E along tho South right-of-way line of
Broadway Ave. a distance of 164.98 ft. to the "Real
Q 7 ~) f 5 I) '~¢int of Beginning" .
The above described property contains 9.42 acres more or
~liess and is subject to rights-of-way of record and in
use.
~~''`RBd~ONB ORD CS - SAUNDSRS Page 1
~2r,~c~~-~ ~~
'97 E~~~ 14 P(1
~~~°° -
NOW, THBRBFORB, BB IT ORDAINHD by the Mayor and City Council
of the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho:
Section 1. That the aforementioned real property which is
described as follows:
A tract of land located in the NSA(, SW~, Section 12,
Township 3 N, Range 1 W, Boise Meridian (B.M.), in the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho; more fully
described as follows:
Beginning at the center ~ corner of Section 12, Township
3 N, Range 1 W, B.M.; thence running S 00°00'00" B along
the North-South center section line of the above said
Section 12 a distance of 687.50 ft. to a point on the
South right-of-way line of Broadway Ave. which is the
"Real Point of Beginning"; thence running S 00°00'00" B
a distance of 296.95 ft. to a point which lies 125.00
ft. from the centerline of the O.P.R.R.; thence running
N 89°05'59" W a distance of 659.49 ft. to a point;
thence running N 00°00'00" S a distance of 483.35 ft. to
a point; thence running N 89°56'30" B a distance of
135.00 ft. to a point; thence running N 00°00'00" B a
distance of 335.07 ft. to a point; thence running N
89°56'30" B a distance of 359.42 ft. to a point on the
West right-of-way line of NW 8th Street; thence running
S 00°00'00" B along the Weat right-of-way line of NW 8th
Street a distance of 532.45 ft. to a point on the South
right-of-way line of Broadway Ave.; thence running N
89°57'30" E along the South right-of-way line of
Broadway Ave. a distance of 164.98 ft. to the "Real
Point of Beginning".
The nbove described property contains 9.42 acres more or
lees and is subject to rights-of-way of record and in
use.
be, and the same is rezoned from R-4 Residential to R-8
Residential, and Section 11-2-425, Official Zoning Maps is hereby
amended to reflect the same. This rezoning is subject to the
conditions referenced in the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law as adopted by the Meridian Council on the request for rezone.
Section 2. .The Applicant shall comply with all of the
Ordinances of the City of Meridian, and comply with the comments
RSZONB ORDINANCB - SAUNDBRS Page 2
of the Planning and Zoning Administator.
Section 3. That the property shall be subject to re-zone
if the owner shall not meet the following requirements:
s. That the Applicnnt 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 rezoning, the Applicant shall be
required to enter into a development agreement as
authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D; that the
development agreement shall address inclusion into the
development the requirement• of 11-9-605 of the Revised
and Compiled Ordinanaea 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 •chedulea sad requirements, 11-9-605 M.
which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways,
and 11-9-606 B 14. which pertains to pressurized
irrigation.
e. That these conditions shall run with the land and bind
the Applicant, the titled owners, and their assigns.
f. Meet the requirements and conditions of the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of Law and meet the Ordinances of
the City of Meridian.
g. That the Applicant is required to enter into a
development agreement and perform development of the
property ae a townhouse project each with a two car
garage for ench unit for which Applicant must apply for,
and obtain a conditional use permit.
h. The development of the property must be performed as a
planned unit development and meet all the requirements
to obtain the planned unit development.
Section 3. That if the Applicant shall fail to meet the
REZONE ORDINANCE - SAUNDERS Page 3
above conditions the property shall be subject to rezone back to
R-4.
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 ita passage and
approval as required by law.
PASSED by the City Council and approvred~by the Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this .~ •--day of ~, 1997.
Au9as-t-
APPROVED:
/~/ _
-- ROBERT D. CORRIS
STATE OF IDAHO,)
ss.
County of Ada, )
$~
v
:~.~0 ~r tsZ . r~
,~,.
'''''''~j/I//ll {I11 111111\\\\\`,,~
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 THS CITY OF MERIDIAN AMENDING AND CHANGING THE ZONING
OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN THS CITY OF MERIDIAN WHICB IS
DESCRIBED AS A TRACT OF LAND LOCATED IN THS NS 1/4, SW 1/4,
SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, BOISE MERIDIAN, IN THE
CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO• AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE"; passed as Ordinance No. ? 6~ , by the City Council and
Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the S day of 1997, as
the same appears in my office. ~juSf-
RBZONS ORDINANCE - SAUNDSRS Page 4
DATED this ~.dav of
1997.
y - _
°a ~-.._
~b ~ ty C er ty of r an
$~,AL $da County, Idaho
STATE OF IDAHE~,.~, ~`~
'~,~-~ r Est • P~c`~~
COUnty Of Ada, 'j,,M1 r`rrr,~.(,"`~1~`~~
On this ~ day of July, 1997, before me, the undersigned,
a Notary Publ~n and for said State, personally appeared WILLIAM
G. BERG, JR., known to me to be the person whose name is
subscribed to the within and foregoing instrument, and
acknowledged that he executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
my official seal the day and year in this certificate first above
written.
SEAL yi.G.~~a.,SA ~``„rs ~_ No Pub c or I aho
_ r ~O ~••~ R si nqq at Meridian, Idah
o ~ .~ ' ommission Bxpires: D v
`++ t
REZONE ORDINANCE - SAUNDERS Page 5
"'~-- -
\~~~.
.,
r •i
.,c~A_
. ~a~,
z
c
W N.~'J~~~'E ~' ~ 1
$ UB ~~,c~ JJJ ~~ '
1=EZoNE aRDINOa`I~ .SN 1
nsrai z N.e4'o6'6q'w, L5q.41~ W `
0
r_-..
ORDISAMCS NO. 7 6 ~
AN ORDINANCE OF THS CITY OF MERIDIAN ANNEXING AND ZONING CHRTAIN
RBAL PROPERTY WHICH IS DHSCRIBHD AS SOUTH OF PINS STREET AND WEST
OF 8TH STREET, BOISE MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Mayor of the City of
Meridian, Idaho, have concluded that it is in the best interest of
said City to annex to the said City seal property which is
described in Section 1 below:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Mayor and City Council
of tha City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho:
Section 1. That the real property described as:
gARCSL 1:
A part of Lot 2 of WESTLAWN SUBDIVISION, according to the
official plat thereof, filed in Book 2 of Plats at Page
94, Official Records of Ada County, Idaho, more
particularly described as follows:
Commencing nt the Northeast corner of Lot 1 of said
W83TLAWN SUBDIVISION; thence
~7~bJ~_i7G
West 126 feet along the South line of West Pine Avenue;
thence
South 125 feet; thence
West 398.40 feet to the REAL POINT OF BSGINNI1bG'p'thence
continuing West 130.0 feet; thence y~~~~
South 335.07 feet; thence East 130.00 feet; 5~l~d~ibl~i ~~ - ~~
`~00
North 335.07 feet to the REAL POINT OF BSGINNINQ
- :.. si ,-
PARCEL II•
A part of the Sast half of Lot 2 of WSSTLAWN SUBDIVISION,
according to the official plat thereof, filed in Book 2
of Plats at Page 94, Official Records of Ada County,
Idaho, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeast corner of Lot 1 of WBSTLAWN
SUBDIVISION; thence
ORDINANCE - LARRY HANSEN PAGE 1
bleat along the South aide of bleat Pine Avenue and the
North line of said Lota 1 and 2, a distance of 524.4
feet; thence
South 125 feet; thence
bleat 40 feet; thence
North 125 feet; thence
8aat 40 feet to the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING.
is hereby annexed to the City of Meridian, and is zoned R-4
Residential; that the reason for the R-4 zoning is to allow the
northern one-quarter acre of the property to continue to be used as
a residence of the Applicants, and the southern three-quarters acre
of the property to be developed for multi-family dwellings such ae
duplexes and four-plexes; 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; that all
ditches, canals and waterways shall be tiled including those that
are property boundaries or only partially located on the property.
Section 2. That the property shall be subject to de-
annexation if the owner shall not meet the following requirementas
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 and rezoning, the
Applicant shall be required to enter into a development
agreement as authorized by 11-2-416 L and 11-2-417 D;
that the development agreement shall address inclusion
into the development the requirements of I1-9-605 of the
Revised and Compiled Ordinances of the City of Meridian
and other matters; that the property may be de-annexed if
ANNEXATION ORDINANCB - LARRY HANSBN PAGE 2
the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement are
not satisfied.
d. That the development of annexed land must meet and comply
with the Ordinances of the City of Meridian and in
particular Section 11-9-616, which pertains to
development time schedules and requirements, 11-9-605 M.
which pertains to the tiling of ditches and waterways,
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.
q. That the Applicant is required to enter into a
development agreement and perform development of
the property as a townhouse project each with a two
car garage for each unit for which Applicant must
apply for, and obtain a conditional use permit.
h. The development of the property must be performed as a
planned unit development and meet all the requirements to
obtain the planned unit development.
Section 3. That the City Clerk shall cause one (1) copy of
the legal description, and map, which shall plainly aad clearly
designate the boundaries of said property, to be filed with the Ada
County Recorder, Ada County Assessor, and the State Tax Commission
within ten (10) days following the effective date of this
Ordinance.
Section 4. EFFECTIVE DATE: There being an emergency,
which emergency is hereby declared to exist, this Ordinance shall
be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval
ae required by law.
PASSED by the City Council and approved b~ the Mayor of the
City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, this .S - day of Auquat,
1997.
APPROVED:
C ~ ~~~-~v-'-2~.~Q.
~~_~ _~
R~ -- ROBERT D. CORRIE
ATTEST:
ANNEXATION ORDINANCE - LARRY HANSEN FAGS 3
``~~`autrrrnrrnn, r'
`~ ~ _P
.~'" ~
-- WILLI BERG, JRe ~~i,~L
?' ,~ ~~y
'~/ • ~1,,.,~, { \,9
,,,~d'c,,,,~SY,;,,~`'k ~,
ORDINANCE -LARRY HANSEN PAGE 4
STATB OF IDABO,i
ss.
County of Ada, )
I, WILLIAM G. BBRG, JR., Citp 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 Amended Ordinance entitled
"AN ORDINANCB OF THB CITY OF MBRIDIAN ANNBXING AND ZONING CBRTAIN
RBAL PROPBRTY WHICH IS DBSCRIBBD AS SOUTH OF PINS STRBBT AND WBST
OF 8TH STRBBT, BOISB MBRIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO; AND PROVIDING AN
BFFBCTIVB DATB"; passed as Ordinance No. 766 , b the City
Council and Mayor of the City of Meridian, on the ~'~'= day of
August, 1997, as the. same appears in my office.
DATED this ~~ day of August, 1997.
hip `? City Clerk, City of M i an
Ada County, Idaho
~~~~
sly, ~ ,p
7 "~@1' 18t • ~ ~F
~'~ p~ ~.
'`~n • ...~~~.
3TATB OF IDAHO,)
as.
County of Ada, )
On this ~S~ ~ day of August, 1997, before me, the
undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally
appeared WILLIAM G. BBRG, 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 WITNBSS WHBRBOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my
official seal the day and year in this certificate first above
written.
•~~~p~E ~nd,,~~,
`~~.~~G L. .,,
Q. ~y°C~q: •~
SBAL ~ >j ~O~• T ~ ~ ~ '_
`~ i .0~6 L\G ®~:
,fig{~
''~~~~C ®C l~~.y, ,,veo
~~
at Meridian, Idaho
sion expires: G~8-Oa -99
ANNBXATION ORDINANCB - LARRY HAN58N PAGB 5
wv[ ~
.,
,~~
.~
.e~p_
~p~G~,tuN1u4.
`` \ _
~,~\
AWN
-' ---~.
'-- D
suB ~~
0
.,\
Rutledps LaDenl ~ - - - - - - - -
CITY OF MERIDIA
PUB~C MEETING SIGN=U~HEET
~~
~'
o-
CITY OF MERIDIA
PUB~C MEETING SIGN-U~HEET
•TY OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULE FOR 8/13/97
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
1-170 RICHARD&KIMBERLY LOYA 721 W 3RD ST 88.84
1-720 DOUGLAS HADLEY 647 W BROADWAY AVE 56.77
1-930 MICHEAL STILES 223 W BROADWAY AVE 92.33
1-1330 KAY LOUISE ETTES 813 W 3RD ST 48.32
1-2040 DOUGLAS SERMONS 203 W IDSHO AVE 60.74
1-2770 HAROLD RIGENHAGEN 552 NW 15 ST 53.08
1-2790 R LEONARD YANCEY 612 NW 15TH ST 99.88
1-3130 R ALLEN FLEMING 935 W PINE AVE 55.77
1-3360 PAUL WILLAMS 535 W PINE AVE 73.74
1-3550 R HARRY D BURKE 829 MERIDIAN ST 90.08
1-3660 SHELLIE FARRAND 411 N MERIDIAN RD 64.96
1-4080 B HOFF FOREST PRODUCTS 420 W FRANKLIN RD 2174.67
-70 CYNTHIA THOMAS 922 W 2ND ST 85.94
-402 NDREW LUBACKY 912 NW 7TH AVE 108.53
-900 B LTA CONSTRUCTION 968 NW 12TH AVE 77.04
-920 EAVER LAURA 1350 W CLARINDA ST 52.00
-958 INA HENDRICKSON 997 NW 14TH ST 107.25
-1200 B SMART 1332 W 1ST ST 103.12
-1290 DANIEL&DIANE MORGAN 1624 W 1ST ST 64.15
-1320 R ELVIN BRINEGAR 27 W CHERRY LN 84.95
-1510 MARK MANWARING 1305 W 1ST ST 84.95
-1550 R GERALD PHILLIPS 1336 W 2ND ST 78.24
-1570 MICHEAL LOCK 1410 W 2ND ST 115.31
-1970 KERRY L CARSON 225 W MAPLE AVE IN FULL 189.87
-2030 R IRGINIA MEYER 230 CAMELLIA AVE 56.83
-2160 CLAY&NANCY O'DELL 24 W CHERRY AVE 73.32
-2190 OSHUA&JOEL THOMAS 312 W CHERRY AVE 58.28
-2200 R MICHELLE WARD 315 W CHERRY AVE 95.07
-3340 R RICHARD POE 1115 W 6TH ST 81.87
-4200 CLAUDE JAMES BLAKELY 1618 W STH ST 105.75
-4520 PATRICIA R WILLIAMS 1409 W 13TH ST 88.08
-4740 UDY ALBRECHT 1406 W 14TH ST 120.34
-4800 UDY TODD 1400 NORTHGATE AVE IN FULL 68.28
-5020 KENNETH WOOD 1538 N CINDER RD 97.25
AEG - 5 r: ~,r
y~y~R , ..~-,:
8/5/9711:29 AM
•TY OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY L•
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULE FOR 8/13/97
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
-2170 ILL RODRIGUEZ 1401 W 14TH ST 107.46
-5610 KRIS HOPKINS/GAY LEE 1504 W WASHINGTON 89.71
-5670 AMES R RANSOM 1017 W 15TH ST 55.48
-5850 PHILLIP A DUPEROUZEL 1406 W CARLTON ST 107.54
-10 OHN JOHNSON 770 N ABERNATHY WY 79.63
3-72 B COREY BARYON BUILDERS 70 N TIDWELL WY FULL BV 11T 93.67
3-292 ROD&JENNIFER SHURTZ 195 W SNYDER DR 145.11
~3-298 DAVID R KING 137 W SNYDER DR 71.81
' 332 DAVID PORTER 1979 W SLATON DR 82.21
344 L DEAN GOODNER 31 N ROTAN AVE 82.25
-374 GREGORY WOMACK 2 N ROTAN AVE 77.29
3-388 LESLIE BRUNTON 1968 W SLATON DR 59.51
3-398 R DONALD DUKART 41 N TALL PINE PL IN FULL 142.25
3-400 AMES ALLEN 795 N TALL PINE PL 89.23
d-1412 RODNEY PLUMLEY 826 W LEONARD CT 109.27
4.1430 R MARY BARNEY 856 W SHERYL ST 100.10
1832 OHN SIMMONS 894 W WILLARD ST 101.33
1908 DARRELL BYERS 1533 N TOKAY WY IN FULL 124.21
1980 B CASCADE BUILDERS INC 195 W SONOMA DR 71.14
2084 RONALD DOUTHIT 98 W SANTA CLARA DR 127.44
-2108 R DARILD WURTZ 93 W SANTA CLARA DR 133.20
2144 DARYL HOLDEN 1340 N VINEYARDS AVE 118.27
-2308 R CHARLES BUTTERFIELD 1475 N SANTA ROSA PL 297.75
230 MICHEAL HUFFMAN 3988 W BLUE CREEK DR 124.59
5-344 DWIGHT CLIFF 120 W BIG CREEK DR 73.99
5-432 MICHEAL MACKINTOSH 3530 W TOWN CREEK DR 98.63
5-858 DAN CORKILL 1333 N DEER CREEK PL 176.28
5-678 MARK A BURT 1341 N OAK CREEK WY 78.45
5-794 R MARK JOHNSTON 3748 W PINE CREEK CT 181.77
19-188 KEVIN WINSTON 752 N TURNBERRY WY 83.90
19-188 B SUPERIOR OUST HOMES 3710 W MOON LAKE ST 49.39
0-1558 LYND HOOVER 3420 SUGAR CREEK DR 107.32
0-1846 MICKEY WARE 3721 SEA ISLAND CT 150.42
0-1890 RONALD LUKESH 1971 INTERLACHEN WY IN FULL 108.94
8/519711:29 AM
•TY OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY L•
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULE FOR 8/13/97
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DU
0-1942 JASON KEMPER 1821 INTERLACHEN WY 73.32
1-80 DARIN LOWE 2402 N LEANN WY 182.83
1-90 B MERICAN TRADITION HMS 474 N WATERSTONE WY 53.08
1-92 OHN ARCHIBALD 496 N WATERSTONE WY 58.58
1-112 RAYMOND CASTANEDA 3 N LEANN WY 82.11
1-136 MIKE STORK 579 N WATERSTONE WY 58.56
1-182 ILLIAM HARWOOD 673 W CREEKSTONE CT 114.19
1-204 DANA DUMOND 2660 W CREEKSTONE CT 85.38
1-566 AMES ANDERSON 859 W PEBBLESTONE CT 98.59
1-966 R KRISTEN GOURLEY 723 W PEBBLESTONE CT C C 150.03
1-1014 R DAVID FUNK 79 N QUARRYSTONE WY 78.27
1-1112 HRIS MCCULLOUGH 599 N OLD STONE WY 100.10
1-1168 DAVID CARLSON 395 N LEANN WY 108.88
1-1172 R RICHARD FALK 375 LEANN WY 82.38
1-1852 MARILYN MYERS 085 KRISTEN 249.16
1-1712 MELONIE JAMES 45 LEANN WY dorES 75.50
1-1760 R CINDY GRAPATIN 1890 MARIANNA PL 119.11
1-1766 RICK COFFMAN 1980 MARIANNA PL C C 101.90
1-1870 R DOUG SCHOPPELREY 644 REBECCA WY 85.34
1-2006 MARK ROSE 1732 N MORELLO WY . 77.57
1-2070 MICHEAL ANKENMAN 993 W ANN ST 73.80
1-2164 R GLEN WAGNONER 3011 W HIGAN ST 75.78
1-2198 ENNIFER LOVAN 3035 W KANDICE ST 72.86
1-2238 R STEVEN BROOKS 962 W KANDICE ST 32.79
1-2626 ROBERT BASAURI 3103 W KENDRICK ST rrsoe~M 316.97
1-2710 STEVEN SHEARER 3191 W FOXTROTTER DR 88.08
1-2736 R RICHARD THURBER 506 N STONE PL 88.07
1-2754 GARY MELTON 415 N VICTOR WY 138.83
1-2880 OYCE CARLSON 008 W FOXTROTTER DR 131.13
1-2918 DAVID REYES 953 W ELK STREAM ST 99.53
1-3108 GORDON CARSON 887 N HEARTH AVE 73.57
1-3036 R GERALDINE BARR 2991 W RAVENHURST ST 113.11
1-3408 WILLIAM THORTON 838 W RAVENHURST ST 173.70
1-3068 PATRICK BOYDSTUN 943 W JOUST ST 91.94
8/5/9711:29 AM
OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY L•
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULE FOR 8/13/87
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
1-3148 B S&W CONSTRUCTION 3078 N HEARTH AVE 75.22
-180 B PIERCE CONSTRUCTION 1991 W EMERALD FALLS 44.42
-888 RONALD POLLARD 307 N KUBIK PL 163.82
-914 R EAN RUCKER 61 MONACO WY 129.62
-926 JASON ELLIOT 115 MONACO WY ,sTen~et 109.05
2-1008 GARNETT BLEDSOE OBS N ASTAIRE WY 105.77
-1050 BILL CANON 2070 N GLENFIELD PL 147.12
2-1068 PAUL LINEBERRY 049 N SPARKLING PL 152.92
-1150 ARY HARRISON 365 W RAINWATER CT 73.03
-1178 ROBERTO LINAZASORO 51 W RAINFALL CT 139.63
-1350 GAYLEN COWGER 1956 MCGLINCHEY ST 138.29
-1356 MARVIN KERBS 1983 HENDRICKS CT C C 179.99
-1398 ILLIAM AVERY 1867 CARINS WY 126.38
-1436 R AMES HANKE 1912 CARINS WY 88.89
-1450 ROBERT FRENCH 1643 W MCGLINCHEY 89.03
-1482 LYLE ANDERSON 1723 SANDALWOOD DR 127.49
-1504 RANDY SIMPSON 1764 SANDALWOOD DR 82.38
-1524 R CARL KOCH 1994 SANDALWOOD DR 101.33
-1546 R BECKY PETERSON 184 MONACO WY 67.17
2-1614 DONALD FISHER 1750 BEARDON CT 74.55
31-124 R JON POWELL 1670 NW 13TH AVE 68.40
31-248 RUSSELL HEUGHINS 1528 W CHERRY LN 109.18
1-502 R MARY ANN OLSEN 1472 STOREY AVE 63.20
1-518 R SHARON JARRETT 1542 STOREY AVE 148.23
1-538 ROBERT MILLER 1521 KINGSWOOD AVE 79.47
31-728 ASON NITZ 1324 NEWPORT DR 80.64
31-732 WILLIAM PENDELTON 132 NEWPORT DR 106.35
31-880 DENNIS NICK 1512 W CHATEAU 122.13
31-1680 MICHEAL CAMPBELL 712 NW 12TH ST 85.62
31-2190 REGORY HVEZDA 788 N 13TH ST 49.39
1-2226 REMAX 1321CLAIRE ST 112.85
t-2238 RENEE TUBBS 1310 DARRAH DR 97.92
31-2258 KIMBERLY SMITCHGER 1464 DARRAH DR 138.60
31-2282 ROBERT NOLAN 1494 DARRAH DR 94.79
8/519711:29 AM
OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY L~
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULE FOR 8/13/97
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
31-2270 RRI OARLOCK 1385 CLAIRE ST 59.23
1-3002 DAVE CHRISTENSEN 40 NW 15TH ST 113.32
1-3016 HARRY DAVIS 17 NW 14TH ST 83.72
31-3034 MARILYN EDWARDS 1311 W CHATEAU AVE 52.88
31-3042 LAN BEAN 1089 W CHATEAU DR 84.11
1-3058 CECIL LIZASO 940 W CHATEAU DR 79.75
1-3060 DAVID BASTIAN 960 W CHATEAU DR 136.89
1-3072 KEN HULSIZER 1080 W CHATEAU DR 83.16
31-3242 DAVID MCGOWAN 211 NW 11TH ST 131.02
31-3294 ROD WERLE 1061 W NEWPORT CT woes 107.59
1-3354 ELIZABETH LEONARDSON 32 NW 10TH ST 50.69
1-3382 R MONTE LEVITY 31 NW 10TH ST 59.57
1-3458 DARRYL HOPKINS 048 NW 9TH PL NSF CC 188.32
31-3474 SHAWN MCDONALD 082 NW 10TH PL NSF CC 184.34
31-3516 ASON MCARTHUR 1814 NW 11TH AVE 88.40
1-3608 MARTIN FISCHER 1836 NW 10TH ST 258.99
2-410 SANDRA STURGIS W CHERRY LN 153.01
2-556 R ILLIAM EDDY 1908 LAWNDALE C C 77.97
32-586 R BARBARA HICKS 1919 CRESTMONT DR C C 153.60
32-816 CONNIE JO JOHNSON 1910 CRESTMONT DR . C C 167.56
32-630 INCENT GARDNER 070 CRESTMONT DR 137.73
-900 DOUGLAS PITMAN 320 N KELSEY PL 150.59
2-910 FRANK CANNELL 395 N KELSEY PL 193.86
2-1380 KEITH HILL 524 W WATERBURY DR 53.36
32-1400 R RANDAL LANDIS 570 N RIDGEBURY WY IN FULL 83.12
32-1404 LAN WHITE 614 N RIDGEBURY WY 74.03
-1436 ALTER MODEN 22 W WOODBURY WY C C 71.97
2-1612 GENA MEHLUM 11 N RIDGEBURY WY 48.16
3-108 IMOTHY CARSON 00 E FAIRVIEW AVE 294.28
3-408 AMES COURT APTS 110 JAMES COURT LN 323.05
33-1838 RODNEY POLENSKY 35 E WOODBURY IN FULL CC 110.25
33.1844 HRISTOPHER KINNEY 445 N LARCHMONT WY 100.94
3-2344 R RONALD PETERSON 0 E WOODBURY DR 74.03
3-2414. ALTER DAVIS 01 E COUGAR DR 59.51
8/5/9711:29 AM
!TY OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY L~
TURN OFF LIST S CHEDULE FOR 8/13/97
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
33-3592 PAMELA GRADER 92 E ADDESON ST gg,20
3-3646 NTHONY EZELL 09 E BALDWIN ST C C 89.07
3-4258 STEVE FROSTROM 53 E MOOSE ST 86.18
3-4346 RON HOLLOWAY 531 N LARCHMONT AVE C C 106.69
33-4348 CHARLES KINGSTON 536 N TUSCAN AVE 91.49
34-342 RONALD DARCO 1888 JERICO RD 142.37
4-388 CHARLES HOWARTH 094 JERICO WY 98,41
34-592 ODD ELLIS 328 N AMETHYST AVE 122.62
784 FREDRICK FREE 1110 E CHATEAU AVE 102.17
34-812 KARL KAUTZ 2298 NE 10TH AVE 112.82
34-886 LLEN DUREN 1021 E GROUSE DR 213.59
914 DONALD AMYX 1281 E HUNTER DR 121.18
918 R OHN FRENCH 1299 E HUNTER DR 43.17
34-942 JIM BECK 1553 E HUNTER DR 151.26
34-1074 LANNY LEWIS 815 N SHOVLER WY 83.48
1102 DONALD LAUGHLIN 1483 E SAGE HEN WY 53.36
1560 HAROLD PHILIP 952 E HAWK ST 114.35
1702 NDY HEDRICK 451 N LARK AVE 128.81
34-1754 DAVID LIEBERMAN 2307 N LARK AVE 108.81
4-1764 R RICHARD CUNNINGHAM 845 E CHATEAU DR 119.44
1844 STEPHAN BUFFAT 092 NE 10TH ST LEAK 298.31
1880 SHANNON JOHNSTON 082 N LARK PL 110.73
2044 ILLIAM MILLER 1855 TEARE AVE 108.42
34-2104 HEIDI TYLER 1034 TAMMY ST 119.28
2126 DANA GRIGG 1015 CLARENE ST 75.88
2128 ON KNIGHT 1025 CLARENE ST 122.97
4-2134 R OPAL BLUME TRUST 1071 CLARENE 92.05
34-2142 R BRYCE WALKER 1881 JERICO RD 98,58
4-2730 ROSALIO ALVEREZ 1196 E COUGAR CREEK DR 69.48
4.2768 R RICHARD THURBER 1285 E COUGAR CREEK D C 55.56
34-2802 BRETT DUNSTAN 1318 E RINGNECK CT 88.36
34-2820 LANCE ROSS 1281 E RINGNECK CT IN FULL 115.12
0-154 B STANFORD HOMES INC 2080 E SUMMERDAWN DR 26.55
0-208 B STANFORD HOMES INC 079 E SUMMERDAWN DR 34.25
8/5/9711:29 AM
•ITY OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULE FOR 8113/97
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
0-250 LONNY TOMICH 1891 E SUMMERHEIGHTS 68.03'
2-452 THOMAS JORGENSEN 409 E GRAPEWOOD DR 117.61
2-456 R BARBARA CIRELLI 443 E GRAPEWOOD DR 118.28
2-488 KYLE HILL 581 E GRAPEWOOD DR NSF CC 207.23
2-1836 R BUD MONROE 187 N DIXIE AVE 148.81
2-1966 CLAY BARRY 1980 E MEADOW WOOD 123.64
2-1978 DAVID MORSE 1810E MEADOW WOOD 59.51
2-2072 ODD MCCLINTICK 047 N WINGATE PL 134.04
2-2094 GEORGE STEIER 02 N WINGATE PL 100.66
2-2252 BRAD MCKINLEY 0 E CHATEAU DR 109.83
2-2294 ROY HAMILTON 122 E KATELYN DR 64.15
2-2404 PHEOBE ROSE 77 N LOCHNESS WY 75.50
2-2496 LESLIE SIEMON 1981 E GLENLOCH ST 124.64
2-2524 R OMAS IMPOMENI 378 N LAUGHRIDGE AVE 128.11
2-2712 JERRY KNAPP 581 N LAUGHRIDGE AVE 79.47
2-2730 RANDALL REPACI 1888 E GLENLOCH ST 118.72
212 RAIG FINLAYSON 3828 E PRESIDENTIAL DR 103.14
274 USTIN CONSTRUCTION 3791 E EISENHOWER NSF CC 308.02
-318 OHN VNUK 3884 E EISENHOWER 53.08
468 KEVIN BORCHARDT 1071 N FILLMORE WY. 64.71
50-2 OM ELLIOT 18 E PINE AVE 59.51
0-210 MITCHELL WILSON 338 E,#2 S 48.53
50-326 EANNE ANN MEEK 327 E CARLTON AVE 58.28
50-878 R LYND HOOVER 1318E 4TH ST 88.48
50-880 R LYND HOOVER 1320E 4TH ST 73.60
50-726 R C.F.I. INVESTMENTS 64 E WASHINGTON AVE IN FULL 67.39
50-1018 JOHN JACOBS 1432E 21 /2 ST 88.07
50-1198 WILLIAM GARDOSKI 1820E 21/2 ST 81.93
50-1368 ARN CULVER 1131E 1ST ST 54.28
0-1408 R ESLEY CORP 1412E 1ST ST 192.07
50-1412 SLEY CORP 1420E 1ST ST 98.32
50-1488 INTERMOUNTAIN RENTAL 1601E 1ST ST 192.78
50-1500 R LARRY BEDDES 1535 OFFC E 1ST ST 1905.30
50-1504 R LARRY BEDDES 1535 APTS E 1ST ST 717.85
8!519711:29 AM
!iY OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY L~
TURN OFF LIST SC HEDULE FOR 8/13/97
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DUE
50-1856 SANDRA AVERIL 1035 E FAIRVIEW 18.64
50-2106 RICHARD ROBINSON 1278 N STONEHENGE WY 102.84
50-2302 KENNETH TODD 1159 E SHELLBROOK DR IN FULL 134.73
50-2416 KORY HANSEN 1361 N PENRITH AVE 88.08
0-3724 STEVE MEISTRELL 995 N RALSTIN PL 73.59
50-3742 KEVIN BAILEY 46 N SCRIVNER WY 119.11
50-4008 DARREN HASKIN 950 N STONEHENGE WY 100.00
50-4270 STEVEN BAKER 1038 N KILLDARE PL 53.38
50-449D BRIAN WINTER 514 E PINE AVE 48.23
50-4506 BETTY JACOBSON 38 E PINE AVE 102.74
51-450 MURRI'S ELECTRONICS 131E IDAHO 154.48
51-482 RICHARD HURRAY 319 E IDAHO AVE 105.37
51-678 R 'LYND HOOVER 534 E IDAHO AVE 101.05
1-3300 DAVID ROBERTS 133 E KING ST 68.37
1-3330 KENT WILSON OS E KING ST 54.78
1-3770 R CINDI ATWOOD 3 E 3RD ST 65.18
1-3420 RED CANYON CORP 6 E KING ST 97.62
1-3820 EFFERY CHANCE 2 E 3RD ST 108.76
1-3840 R ! KIMBERLY WOLFE 24 E 3RD ST 66.61
51-3990 DANNY FISHER 116 E ADA ST 47.48
51-4218 R LYND HOOVER 55 E BOWER ST 87.12
1-4230 R BOB PLATEN 349 E BOWER ST 38.16
4-12 THE PLAYGROUND PLAYGROUND STORE 871.08
54-14 E PLAYGROUND 1780 E OVERLAND RD 225.86
54-16 E PLAYGROUND 1780 E OVERLAND RD 202.56
54-18 HE PLAYGROUND 1780 E OVERLAND RD 202.56
5-212 RONALD SHANNON 1801 E TIME ZONE DR 64.99
5-336 RON CHARRIER 1929 E THREE BARS DR 48.16
9-498 R OESEPH ZEHRUNG 1072 E SHEPHERD ST 72.24
9-524 PAT ELORDI 1082 E PEACOCK ST 135.27
9-568 ROGER JUDGE 1107 E SHEPHERD ST 93.88
9-1076 DAVID RUPERT 923 STE. E MARTIN DR 96.58
91304 KENNETH WILDE 508 S ABACO 183.27
9-1388 ~ LEROY JENKINS 300 SE 5TH WY 264.84
8/5/9711:29 AM
,fY OF MERIDIAN -DELINQUENCY L~
TURN OFF LIST SCHEDULE FOR 8/13/87
ACCT.# NAME ADDRESS NOTES PAST DU
9-1574 ROSS MASON 18 E LINKERSHIM DR 176.53
2-132 R DEL BRADLEY STINE 1870 S GULL COVE PL 87.01
72-156 DAVID WEIL 017 S COVEY PL 106.38
74-60 R VALERIE ALVES 343 SW 7TH AVE 117.21
74-354 MICHEAL SAUNDERS 78 HANOVER CT 83.16
4-356 OE WILSON 92 HANOVER CT 88.80
4-362 PAUL GALLAS 68 HANOVER CT 68.05
4-708 R GARY FRANK 140 SW 7TH AVE 102.06
41050 R STA MONTGOMERY 8 ROSE CIR 80.31
4-1056 SANDRA HINZ ROSE CIR 57.24
4-1260 R ROBERT HAYFIELD 305 S MERIDIAN ST 29.82
74-2368 FLOYD ELDRED 1014 CRESTWOOD CIR 143.21
74-2390 BRIAN CURRY 1058 W LOUISVILLE CT 81.93
4-2520 DAVID TOLAND 1395 W KIMBRA ST IN FULL 143.37
74-2612 LVIN IRBY 1001 W KIMBRA IN FULL 41.47
4-2616 NOEL PETERSON 971 W KIMBRA ST 45.61
42664 HARON HOUSE 77 W PENNWOOD ST 68.36
4-2662 DAVID HANSEN 8 S OUTFIELD WY C C 119.78
4-2840 RAIG MACHO 1 S SPOONHILL AVE 66.86
4-2826 RACY USSERY 1345 W MERGANSER DR 112.57
4-2896 R LORAINE PERKINS 1520 W MERGANSER DR 50.52
74-3022 RICHARD GRAY 1063 W LOON ST 100.27
34-3072 CHAD LYTLE 92 W LOON ST 63.20
4-3122 STEVEN WESTERBERG 8 S MUSCOVY AVE 88.28
4-3260 BRIAN GARDNER 0 S CANVASBACK WY 103.01
43296 ROB BIENAPL S CANVASBACK WY 82.44
4-3336 KENNETH IlG 1525 W GANDER DR 72.37
4-3358 STEPHEN PAYNE 1311 W GANDER DR 59.39
4-3822 CYNTHIA RUSSELL 1134 W WALTMAN DR 53.36
,~1 TOTAL PAST DUE 35710.04
R =RENTER
B =BUILDER
8/519711:29 AM